STATE OF M P Vs. ANAND KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE has filed this petition for setting-aside order dated 11-12-1997 passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 182/96 restoring seniority of respondent No. 1 in the category of Dy. Collector from the date of his appointment and for fixing his such seniority at par with respondent No. 2 and for consequential promotion.

(2.) NOTICE of this petition was given to respondents on 19-8-1998 but though respondent No. 2 was served she has gone unrepresented. It transpires that respondent No. 1 filed O. A. No. 182/96 before the Tribunal claiming that his seniority was wrongly lowered down even though he was senior to private respondent No. 2. His case was that he was appointed as Dy. Collector on probation for two years vide order dated 11-6-1981 on the recommendations of the Public Service Commission. He claimed that he figured higher in order of merit in the merit list of the Commission and as such was to be treated senior to private respondent No. 2 Ku. Suraj Rokade. But he was pushed behind respondent No. 2 eventually. While this respondent was given higher pay-scale in 1987, he got it on 6-9-1989, even though he had cleared the departmental examination on 21-1-1987. He accordingly prayed that his seniority position be corrected and he be assigned proper place in the seniority list.

(3.) PETITIONER-STATE resisted this petition by taking shelter under Rule 13 (iii) of M. P. State Administrative Services (Classification, Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1975 and Rules 8 and 12 of M. P. Civil Services (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961 and by submitting that respondent No. 1 was neither entitled to be confirmed in service on the post of the Dy. Collector from 1-7-1983, nor could his seniority be reckoned from the date of appointment as he had failed to clear the departmental examination within two years of his probation. It was pointed out that he had cleared the departmental examination on 21-1-1987 and was accordingly confirmed on 22-1-1987, much after the expiry of the probation period and thus his seniority was lowered down in accordance with Rule 12 (a) (ii) of M. P. C. S. (General Conditions of Service) Rules, 1961 read with circular dated 30-5-1970 issued under Rule 13 of the other set up Rules i. e. Rules of 1975. It was further explained that he was considered by the D. P. C. on 9-3- 1993 for selection grade but was not found fit. He was later given this grade from 14-9-1994 after the next D. P. C. found him fit. Petition was also contested on the plea of latches as respondent No. 1 and approached the Tribunal after about 9 years.