GURMIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the petition, mainly following prayer has been made:-

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case of the petitioners is covered by judgment, dated 25.10.2010 in CWP No.4143 of 2010 and connected matters, which is as follows:- "THE petitioners in all these cases are aggrieved on three grounds:- (1) THEir seniority which has been settled in the year 1996 has been unsettled; (2) THE pay has been re-fixed and (3) Consequential recovery. 2. All the petitioners joined service as Technicians on daily wages. All of them have been regularized from the year 1994 onwards. On such regularization the seniority was fixed based on the age of the incumbent concerned. Apparently, realizing the mistake that the crucial factor of date of joining service was ignored, steps were taken to rectify the same and redraw the seniority. It appears that there have been various intra departmental communications. But, it is not clear from the reply as to whether before thus recasting the seniority, the petitioners were given an opportunity to submit their objections. True, it is stated in the reply that a provisional seniority list as on 31.5.2009 on the basis of the date of joining as daily wagers was circulated as per letter No. 927-33, dated 22.4.2010 inviting objections, but no objections were received and hence the seniority list has been finalized by proceedings dated 25.5.2010.

(3.) SENIORITY, it is a well settled principle, is to be based on either the date of joining duty in the regular service or on the date of advice for the job which is based on the position in the select list, unless otherwise prescribed in accordance with law. If two or more persons join on the same day, their interse seniority has to be fixed based on their age, the older in age being placed above the younger. That is the only situation where age becomes a relevant factor in fixing the seniority. It is also another settled principle that seniority once duly and properly settled, will not normally be reopened. However, if for some demonstrably wrong factual or legal mistakes the same has to be reopened, before deciding to do so, notice has to be given to the affected parties. Yet another principle is that once the seniority has been finalized as per the direction of the Court or where seniority list has the approval of the Court, the same cannot be unsettled otherwise than through a judicial process.