SURJIT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

(3.) The never-ending dispute between the direct recruits and the promotees has again surfaced in these appeals. The year 1962 onwards, the Central Secretariat Service Rules (for short, the Rules) framed under the proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution of India provided a ratio of 1/6th and 5/6th between the direct recruits and the promotees. On July 1, 1982, the ratio was changed to 1/5th and 4/5th between the direct recruits and the promotees respectively. In the year 1983, a writ petition under Art. 32 was filed by the promotee officers titled H. N. Hardasani v. Union of India. This Court had directed that the unfilled vacancies meant for the direct recruits might be carried forward for over two years and subsequently unfilled vacancies meant for direct recruits might be thrown open for being filled up by the promotees. A statutory shape was given to the said direction by amending the Rules. In these cases, we are concerned with the Section Officers in the Central Secretariat. When fresh seniority list was being prepared, another writ petition came to be filed titled Amrit Lal v. Union of India. This Court directed therein preparation of the seniority list in the light of the direction given by this Court which stood transformed into Amended Rules. Consequently, a seniority list had been prepared giving due placement to the direct recruits and the promotees in accordance with the rota and quota as operating under the Rules. Again, a third round of litigation had been started by filing of an Original Application in the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal in the impugned order made in O.A. No. 629 of 1994, on March 22, 1995 and the review order following therefrom on May 23, 1996, has put the clock back, stating that prior to the amendment of the Rules putting two years limitation on carry forward of the vacancies meant for the direct recruits would mean that earlier to that date the Government of India had no power to carry forward and thereafter, when the Rules had come into force, the Government had power to carry forward the vacancies limited to two years. Therefore, all the promotions made earlier to the amendment of the Rules must be held to have been thrown open to the promotees and subsequently, as and when the vacancies would not be filled up within two recruitment years, after the amendment has been brought into force after expiry of two recruitment years, the unfilled vacancies reserved for direct recruits would also be thrown open to the promotees; the seniority list is required to be prepared afresh in that manner. Thus, these appeals by special leave.