In this writ petition, the High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the petitioner's challenge to a Tribunal order. The Court held that promotion to Grade IV must be granted based on seniority in the basic grade as per a 1995 Circular superseding earlier instructions, thereby rejecting the petitioner's claim.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAI PUR
DB Civil Writ Petition No.5981/ 2012 Gyarsi Lal Verma Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. & ors. Date of Order :: 21/ 01/ 2015
PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTI CE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR. JUSTI CE J.K. RANKA
Mr. GP Kaushik, counsel for the petitioner Mr. Inderjeet Singh, counsel for the respondents.
Instant petition is directed against order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dt.30th August, 2011.
Brief facts of the case are that in the Basic Gradation List of Technician BCR Gr.III & IV, copy of which is on record, indisputably, the impleaded respondents namely; Om Narain Sharma and T.N. Pareek are placed at serial No. 10 and 13 and at the same time, name of the present petitioner finds place at serial No.54 and his grievance was
that these two impleaded respondents ( Om Narain Sharma and T.N. Pareek) were junior to him in the inter-se list of BCR Gr.III and as such, he too is entitled to seek promotion in BCR Gr. IV from the date his two juniors, as alleged by him, were promoted by the respondents vide order dt.22/08/2001
and which was subject matter of challenge in the Original
2
Application before the Tribunal.
It is brought to our notice that the circular dt.13/12/1995, issued by the authorities much before the promotion exercise for the post of BCR Gr.IV, is referred to by the Apex Court in its judgment rendered in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Ghanshyam Dass (s) and others, reported in 2011(4) SCC 374. The relevant para of the said judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, which is relevant for the present purpose, is being quoted ad-infra:-
“12. We further find on a reading of the Circular dated 13-12-1995 of the Government that after the order dated 7-7-1992 of the Tribunal in Santosh Kapoor Case was affirmed by this Court in Civil Appeal No.3201 of 1993 on 9-9-1993 the Government undertook a review of the existing procedure of promotion to Grade IV and decided in supersession of earlier instructions that promotio to Grade IV may be given from amongst officials in Grade III on he basis of their seniority in the basic grade. This would be clear from the relevant portion of the Circular dated 13-12-1995 extracted below:
“Review of the existing procedure of promotion to Grade IV (now designated as Chief Supervisor) under the BCR Scheme has been under consideration in view of the judgment of the Principal
3
Bench, New Delhi upheld by the Supreme Court. It has now been decided in supersession to earlier instructions that promotion to the said Grade IV may be given from amongst officials in Grade III on the basis of their seniority in the basic grade....”
From above, it clearly envisages that the seniority list of the persons shall be considered on the basis of their
seniority in the basic grade.
Indisputably, the petitioner is junior to the impleaded respondents in basic grade but as regards the inter-se seniority list of Gr. III is concerned, after issuance of Circular dt.13/12/1995, it remained insignificant and the promotions are made in terms of the Circular dt.13/12/1995 taking into consideration the seniority list of basic grade, copy of which is on record and indisputably, the present petitioner is much junior to the impleaded respondents with whom he is claiming parity i.e. Promotion in Grade III & IV.
It reveals from the order of the Tribunal that the Circular dt.13/12/1995 remained unnoticed and the parties have also not placed the said circular on record and the proceedings were initiated on the basis of the circular
4
dt.18/02/1994 but we find that the circular dt.18/02/1994
stood superseded by the subsequent circular dt.13/12/1995, copy of which is on record, and that makes the position clear that the seniority is now to be considered for promotion to Gr. III and IV on the basis of the seniority in the basic grade and admittedly the petitioner is much junior to the impleased respondents in the seniority list of basic grade and that being so, his grievance seeking promotion to Gr. III and IV from the date of his alleged juniors, remains unsubstantiated from the material on record and taking note thereof, we do not find any error in the Tribunal's order.
Consequently, the writ petition, being devoid of
merit, is hereby dismissed.
(J.K. Ranka), J. (Ajay Rastogi), J. Raghu
Cer t i f i cat e: Al l cor r ect i ons made i n t he j udgment / or der have been i ncor por at ed i n t he j udgment / or der bei ng e- mai l ed. Raghu, Sr . PA.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to promotion in Grade IV from the date his juniors were promoted based on seniority in the inter-se list rather than the basic grade.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Ghanshyam Dass (s) and othersReferred¶12
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. Ghanshyam Dass (s) and others, 2011(4) SCC 374 · Who else cites this
Gyarsi Lal Verma
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.
Om Narain Sharma
T.N. Pareek
Ajay Rastogi
J.K. Ranka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
