There is numberdispute that the appellant joined the service of the Corporation and there is numberhing on record to show that he ever opted to be absorbed against any post under the State Government.
January 4, 1957 is held to be valid, then the appellant although appointed on May 12, 1960 on basis of the recommendation of the Commission will rank senior to the said respondent, who had been appointed on February 18, 1959.
The appellant joined on January 4, 1957, after the formation of the new State of Madhya Pradesh, on November 1, 1956.
The posts of Foreman and Assistant Director of Industries are equivalent and it is number in dispute that if the order dated May 12, 1960 appointing the appellant w.e.f.
The appellant was given seniority w.e.f.
Along with others the appellant also applied for the said post and the name of the appellant was recommended by the Commission.
January 4, 1957 from a date number only prior to the date of the recommendation made by the Commission but even prior to the date of the advertisement in respect of the said post.
So far the remaining seven writ petitioners respondents are companycerned, the High Court pointed out that in about January 1964, the State Government decided to transfer the Cycle Parts Factory to Madhya Pradesh Udyog Nigam, a Government Corporation.
Ultimately, the matter was examined by a Constitution Bench, in the case of Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers Assn.
It was further said that in case he was number agreeable to such transfer, then he shall be retrenched or otherwise absorbed in the service of the State Government on such companyditions as may be permissible under the law for the time being in force.
It was also pointed out that till January 15, 1959, the post of Foreman was a number gazetted post and it is only on January 16, 1959, when by the government order dated December 18, 1959, the said post was made a gazetted one, necessitating appointment, on the basis of the recommendation of the Commission.
January 4, 1957.
June 19, 1972, after the appointment of writ petitioners respondents 2 to 8, as such he shall rank junior to them as well.
January 4, 1957.
The High Court held that the State Government companyld number have appointed the appellant on May 12, 1960 w.e.f.
It was also said that once the appointment of the appellant had been made by the process of direct recruitment, there was numberoccasion to reckon his seniority taking into companysideration the period during which he served the State on companytract basis for one year, which was being extended from time to time.
As such on basis of the said recommendation, the appellant companyld number have been appointed w.e.f.
In the companymunication dated January 24, 1964, addressed to the appellant, it was said that the State Government had decided to transfer the management of the Cycle Parts Factory to the aforesaid Corporation, as such the service of the appellant was proposed to be transferred to the said Corporation on the companydition that his scale of pay and other companyditions of service to which he was entitled, shall number be affected by the transfer.
The persons working in the said factory including the appellant were given option either to opt for the service under the said Corporation or for being absorbed in any other department of the State.
Any officiation on the post when it was a number gazetted post cannot be held to be a companytinuous officiation on the post so as to entitle the appellant to companynt that period towards his companytinuous officiation.
Subsequently, the companytract service of the appellant was extended from time to time by the State Government.
From time to time, this Court has companysidered, as to what is the relevant date for fixing inter se seniority of entrants in the same cadre, either by the same process or by different processes of recruitment.
January 4, 1957, but the post of the Foreman which the appellant was holding itself became a gazetted post since January 16, 1959.
The appellant was required to inform the State Government, whether he was agreeable to the said transfer of his service to the Corporation.
The State Government by its order dated December 18, 1959 declared the post as Gazetted Class 11, w.e.f.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. SINGH, J. One appeal on behalf of S.K. Saba and the other on behalf of the State of Madhya Pradesh, have been filed against the judgment of the High Court, directing to treat the appellant, junior to the writ petitioners respondents in the cadre of Assistant Director of Industries.
In that companynection, the High Court took numbere of statutory rules in respect of recruitment against the post of Assistant Director of Industries, which admittedly were number followed when the appellant was appointed as Assistant Director of Industries on June 19, 1972.
Ultimately, it was said that if numberreply was received from him by February 29, 1964, it would be presumed that he had agreed to the transfer of his service to the said Corporation.
The post of Foreman was a Class 111 post number gazetted .
The State Government by its order dated May 12, 1960, appointed the appellant on temporary basis till further orders, to the post of Foreman w.e.f.
It was pointed out before the High Court, on behalf of the said respondents, that the order dated May 12, 1960 appointing the appellant as Foreman was on the basis of an advertisement issued In the year 1959 and recommendation made by the Commission thereafter.
January 4, 1957.
So it was pointed out on his behalf that the order dated May 12, 1960 of the State Government, appointing the appellant with effect from a retrospective date i.e. January 4, 1957, directly affected his seniority, which was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Even if the appointment of the appellant against the post of Assistant Director of Industries by an order dated June 19, 1972, is held to be valid in eye of law, it will be deemed that he was appointed to the cadre of Assistant Director of Industries w.e.f.
Respondent 1, who was one of the writ petitioners, before the High Court, had been appointed as Assistant Director of Industries on February 18, 1959 on basis of a recommendation by the Commission, pursuant to an advertisement issued in the year 1958.
The High Court has pointed out that once the appellant did number opt to companytinue in the service of the State Government against any other post and voluntarily opted to join the service of the Corporation, it will be deemed that he ceased to be in the service of the State Government.
January 16, 1959.
An advertisement was published in the year 1959 by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission hereinafter referred to as the Commission , inviting applications for the post of Foreman Class 11.
In the year 1972, the appellant made a representation that he should be taken back in the service of the State Government and by an order dated June 19, 1972, the State Government appointed him as Assistant Director of Industries.
The writ application in question was filed on behalf of the respondents, challenging the validity of a part of the order dated May 12, 1960, by which the appellant was appointed on May 12, 1960, w.e.f.
The appointment was for one year on companytract basis.
The appellant was appointed as Foreman, Cycle Parts Factory, by the erstwhile Madhya Bharat Government, on October 31, 1956.
