KANAIYALAL SATYANARAYAN KAHAR Vs. CHIEF OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is holding the post of Sainik in the Fire Section of the respondent-Corporation by this petition is praying for the direction to the respondents to promote him with retrospective effect i.e. from the date on which the junior to him has been promoted to the post of Sir Sainik. This petition has been opposed by respondents. They filed the reply and thereafter there are further pleadings of the parties. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) From the documents which have been enclosed to the affidavit of the respondents dated 9/07/1999 in the civil application No.6951/99 I find that the seniority has been fixed on the basis of date of birth of the employees where both joined on the same date. This is clearly reflecting from the document at page no.70 which is there in the C.A. aforesaid.

(3.) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the seniority list has been prepared on the basis of the date of the order of appointment. However, in neither of the documents which pertain to the seniority of the employees, the date of the order of appointment has been mentioned. Otherwise also, this is wholly an arbitrary criterion. The petitioner and many other persons have joined on the same date. Here reference may have to the case of Vasant Rao Shirke who and the petitioner joined on the same date but the date of birth of the petitioner is 7-9-1945 whereas his date of birth is of 1953. So that would have been the criterion in the absence of any rule which is not pointed out by the counsel for the respondents for laying down the seniority. The whole approach of the respondents to consider the petitioner junior on the criterion of the date of order of the appointment is perverse and it cannot be allowed to stand.