K TRIMURTHULU Vs. M V N MURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants before us who challenge the judgment and order dated 2nd April, 1993 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench were directly recruited on their names being sponsored by the Employment Exchange. They were initially appointed as Temporary Casual Skilled Fitters but were subsequently regularised on or after 15-6-1983 on different dates. These appellants were also allowed to appear in the Departmental qualifying Examination for promotion to the posts of Highly Skilled Fitter Grade-II which they passed and were, therefore, promoted, some with effect from 6-7-1984 vide Naval Dockyard Notification dated 22-9-1981 while others with effect from 1-2-1985 vide Notification dated 20-2-1985.

(2.) Both these notifications were challenged by the respondents (Nos. 1-43) (for short, 'the respondents') before the Tribunal on several grounds including that the appellants could not be treated as senior to them particularly as the respondents were admitted in the Naval Dockyard Apprentices School, Vishakhapatnam and after qualifying in various Trade Tests, were absorbed as Skilled Fitters on different dates between 12-11-1979 and 27-1-1983. It was contended that since the respondents had been absorbed as Skilled Fitters earlier than the appellants, they rank senior to them and the Admiral Superintendent, Naval Dockyard (respondent No. 44) was not justified in treating the appellants as senior to the respondents by including the period of their casual service as regular service for purpose of seniority.

(3.) Naval Dockyard did not dispute the contention of the respondents that the appellants were promoted to the posts of Highly Skilled Fitter Grade-II on the basis of their seniority over the respondents by taking into account the period of their casual service.