K RAMALINGAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 1. 12. 1998 of the Central Administrative Tribunal in o. A. No. 235 of 1998 and the order of the first respondent in Memorandum no. 1401/10/97-AIS (I) dated 19. 1. 98 and to restore the seniority of the petitioner as per order No. 14014/45/94-AIS (I) dated 29. 9. 94.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows :- THE petitioner was appointed as Class I Officer in the commercial Tax Department of the State of Tamil Nadu after being selected by the Tamil nadu Public Service Commission and in course of time he was promoted to different posts and ultimately he was promoted as Joint Commissioner. In 1994, the petitioner was recruited to Indian Administrative Service by process of selection as envisaged under Rule 4 (1) (c) read with 8 (2) of the Indian administrative Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954, hereinafter called the recruitment Rules. On 29. 9. 1994, the Government of India taking into account the length of past service of the petitioner rendered in his former service under the State Government, fixed the year of allotment as 1986 by giving 8 years weightage. This was apparently done in accordance with Rule 3 (3) (iii) of the Indian Administrative Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1987 as amended in 1989, (hereinafter referred to as the Seniority Rules ). In course of time, the petitioner was promoted to Junior Administrative Grade in the post of junior Secretary and the petitioner was expecting that he would be promoted to senior Grade. While the matter stood thus, the Central Government issued a notice dated 18. 6. 1997 to the petitioner wherein it was indicated that one Shri T. R. Gopalan was placed at S. No. 1 in the Select List and the petitioner was placed at S. No. 2 and since Shri T. R. Gopalan had been assigned 1989 as his year of allotment, the petitioner could not have been assigned 1986 as the year of allotment, and therefore, the year of allotment was required to be revised and accordingly the petitioner was asked to submit his representation, if any, in writing.

(3.) IN order to appreciate the contentions raised, it is necessary to notice the relevant provisions relating to seniority as contained in the Seniority Rules, 1987. Such Rules have been framed in exercise of power conferred under Section 3 (1) of the All INdia Services Act, 1951. Rule 3 relates to assignment of year of allotment. As per Rule 3 (1), every officer shall be assigned a year of allotment in accordance with the provisions contained in the Rules. Rule 3 (3), as it originally stood in 1987, is as follows :- 3 (3) The year of allotment of an officer appointed to the Service after the commencement of these rules shall be as follows :- (i) the year of allotment of a direct recruit officer shall be the year following the year in which the competitive examination was held: Provided that if a direct recruit officer is permitted to join probationary training under rule 5 (1) of the IAS (Probation) Rules, 1954, with direct recruit officers of a subsequent year of allotment, then he shall be assigned that subsequent year as the year of allotment. (ii) the year of allotment of a promotee officer shall be the same as the year of allotment of the junior-most among the direct recruit officers who officiated continuously in a senior post from a date earlier to the date of appointment of the promotee officer to the Service. (iii) The year of allotment of an officer appointed by selection may be determined ad hoc by the Central Government on the recommendation of the State Government concerned and in consultation with the commission: Provided that he shall not be allotted a year earlier than the year of allotment of a promotee officer already appointed to the service and whose length of service in the State Civil Service is more than the length of continuous service of the former in connection with the affairs of the State. There was an amendment to Rule 3 (3) (iii) in 1989 to the following effect :- 3 (3) The year of allotment of an officer appointed to the Service after the commencement of these rules shall be as follows :- (i ). . . (ii ). . . (iii) The year of allotment of an officer appointed by selection shall be determined in the following manner:- (a) for the first 12 years of gazetted service, he shall be given a weightage of 4 years towards fixation of the year of allotment; (b) he shall also be given a weightage of one year for every completed 3 years of service beyond the period of 12 years, referred to in sub-clause (a), subject to a maximum weightage of 5 years. IN this calculation, fractions are to be ignored. (c) the weightage mentioned in sub-clause (b) shall be calculated with effect from the year in which the officer is appointed to the service: Provided that he shall not become senior to another non state Civil Service Officer already appointed to the service. Provided further that he shall not be allotted a year earlier than the year of allotment assigned to an officer already appointed to the service in accordance with sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the Recruitment Rules, whose length of class I continuous service in the State Civil Service is equal to or more than the length of Class I continuous service of the former in connection with the affairs of the State. Rule 4 relates to inter-se seniority of the officer who are assigned the same year of allotment and it is to the following effect :- 4. INter-se seniority of the officer who are assigned the same year of allotment.- The inter-se seniority of the officers appointed to the Service shall be in the following order and in each category the inter-se seniority shall be determined in the following manner:- (i ). . . (ii ). . . (iii) officers appointed by selection shall be ranked inter-se in the order in which their names are arranged by the Commission for the purpose of appointment to the Service by selection.