G C GOSWAMI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Inter-se seniority in the cadre of Inspectors, Motor Vehicles, based on passing of departmental examination came precisely to be canvassed by the petitioner-appellant herein by challenging seniority lists dated 18-12-1986 and 6-2-1988 in Special Civil Application No. 6163 of 1991 and now in this Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment dated 26-12-1991 rendered by the learned single Judge in the said Special Civil Application.

(2.) According to the petitioner he joined services in May, 1972 as Assistant Inspector of Motor Vehicles as a direct recruit. He stood promoted to the post of Inspector in April, 1980. Upon completion of 3 years of his service he became eligible to appear in the departmental examination in the month of April, 1983 and he in fact appeared in January, 1984 and passed the said examination at first attempt within specified chances and within specified period. According to him, some respondents had not cleared the examination within the specified period and/or within specified chances and, therefore, they would not be entitled to get promotion prior to the petitioner and their cases cannot be considered before the case of the petitioner is considered. In the impugned seniority lists the petitioner has been shown junior to the respondents and such an action of showing the petitioner junior to the respondents, on the part of the respondents authorities, is contrary to law and sought to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) The learned single Judge, upon consideration of the relevant rules, found that even if a candidate does not qualify himself by passing relevant examination within the stipulated period and/or stipulated chances, he does not get his right to the promotion of higher post of R.T.O./ A.R.T.O. forfeited and such an act would have no reflection over the seniority so far as the lower cadre of Inspector/Supervisor is concerned. Reference is made to the fact that the original proviso provided even with regard to the claim of seniority for the purpose of promotion, but then the said proviso came to be amended in the year 1982 with retrospective effect from 30/09/1978 saying that if a person becomes eligible for the promotion to the post of A.R.T.O./R.T.O., he shall not be entitled to claim seniority over those persons who have been promoted to the post of A.R.T.O./R.T.O. as the case may be, before he became eligible for promotion on account of he having been passed the departmental examination earlier than him. Bearing in mind the fact that (1) Spl. Civil Appln. No. 2860 of 1983 decided on 16-12-1983 by Guj. High Court. . no actual promotion had taken place it has been held that the petitioner cannot claim any benefit over the respondents on the basis of the rules in question. Distinguishing the decision in Special Civil Application No. 2860 of 1983 (N. M. Nayi and Ors. v. Collector, Mehsana District) and companion matters, rendered on 16-12-1983 by a Division Bench of this Court and relying upon an identical case in Kiritkumar Kantilal Malani v. State of Gujarat and Ors., reported in [1985 (2)] XXVI (2). the learned single Judge held that the passing of relevant examination within the stipulated period and/or stipulated chances would not have any reflection on the seniority so far as lower cadre of Inspector/Supervisor is concerned. He, therefore, dismissed the petition with the result that the petitioner is before this Court as stated above.