SHIVPAL Vs. STATE OF M.P. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was appointed in the State Civil Services as a Deputy Collector after due selection by the PSC. He was appointed to the post in the year 1990. It seems that in the seniority list, originally published after he joined on 7.5.1990, he was ranked senior to respondents No. 2 to 11, but subsequently after undergoing training he was only confirmed with effect from 24.1.1996, after he had passed all the departmental examinations. After he was confirmed on the post, he was assigned seniority with effect from 24.1.1996, but he was placed junior not only to his batchmates, who were selected in the selection process held in the year 1990, but also to the appointees of the subsequent year from 1991 onwards upto 1996. Claiming seniority and refixation of seniority, an application was filed before the State Administrative Tribunal and on winding up of the Tribunal, matter has travelled to this Court.

(2.) Even though respondents have filed reply and only say that the petitioner has been assigned proper seniority with effect from the date of his confirmation, but the question of assigning seniority to a person on confirmation of probation and the interpretation of rule 12 of the M.P. Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules of 1961"), has been made by a Full Bench of this Court in its order passed on 17.2.2012 in Writ Appeal No. 607/2011 (Dr. Masood Akhtar v. R.K. Tripathi), and after evaluating the legal principle and after considering the provisions of rule 12(1)(a) and (f) of the Rules of 1961 in paragraph 11, the rule has been interpreted by the Full Bench in the following manner:

(3.) Thereafter, the following principles are laid down by the Full Bench as under: