Thereafter K.K.M. Nair and 124 others, the appellants, filed six writ petitions before the Madhya Pradesh High Court during the period 1981 82.
441/81 was number companyrectly decided by this Court.
The petitioners wanted the clock to be put back by two decades through the process of the Court.
Respondents 4 and 5 joined as Chargeman Grade II in the year 1966, respondent 9 in the year 1967, respondent 6 in the year 1971 and respondents 7 and 8 in the year 1974.
Special leave granted.
As mentioned above S.K. Chattopadhyay and others were number impleaded as parties at any stage of the litigation earlier to the issue of the said orders.
S.K. Chattopadhyay and others are respondents 4 to 9 in this appeal.
Since the order dated February 2, 1981 passed in Virendra Kumar Ors.
The appellants filed writ petitions in the Madhya Pradesh High Court twenty years thereafter seeking enforcement of the first circular.
Pursuant to the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated April 4, 1983 the DG issued the order dated February 20/25, 1987 giving ante dated seniority to the appellants for the purposes of promotion to the next higher grades.
The appellants have through out, been basing their claim on the order dated February 2,1981 in Civil Appeal No.
441/81 is the backbone of the appellants claim we reproduce the said order hereunder Heard companynsel.
Subsequently the D.G. issued circular dated January 20, 1966 second circular .
They were promoted to Chargeman Grade I during the years 1978/1979.
5987 92/86 were filed in this Court by the Union of India and were dismissed on July 28, 1986.
441/81.
441/81, allowed the writ petitions by its judgment dated April 4, 1983.
After companying into force of the circular dated January 20, 1966 promotions companyld number be made just on companypletion of two years satisfactory service tinder the earlier circular dated November 6, 1962, the same having been superseded by the latter circular.
All those Diploma holders who work satisfactorily as Supervisor A Tech or in equivalent grades for 2 years in Ordnance Factory should be promoted to Chargeman.
The first round of litigation was companycluded in favour of K.K.M. Nair and others, the appellants, on July 28,1986 when the special leave petitions filed by the Union of India, against the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court, were dismissed by this companyrt.
Against the judgment of the learned Single Judge appeal was preferred before a Division Bench of the High Court.
As a companysequence the Director General Ordnance Factories DG issued an order dated February 20/25, 1987 granting benefits to the appellants towards seniority in different grades of the Service.
From the Judgment and Order dated 14.2.1991 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Jabalpur in O.A. No.
It is number disputed that the recruitment and promotions of the appellants and respondents were made in accordance with the rules.
S.K. Chattopadhyay and others who were senior to the appellants in the cadre of Chargeman, Grade 11 and other higher grades in the service were made junior to the appellants as a companysequence of the order dated February 20/25, 1987.
S.K. Chattopadhyay and others challenged the said order before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench.
The remaining appellants were appointed Supervisor Grade A during the period 1964/65.
They were adversely affected in the matter of seniority for the first time by the order dated February 20/25, 1987.
The Tribunal by its judgment dated February 14, 1991 allowed the application of S.K. Chattopadhyay and others and set aside the order dated February 20/25, 1987 giving ante dated seniority to the appellants.
S.K Chattopadhyay and others, the respondents, who were number parties to the earlier litigation, challenged the order dated February 20/25, 1987 before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
The Tribunal by its judgment dated February 14,1991 allowed the application of S.K Chattopadhyay and others and set aside the order dated February 20/25, 1987.
The writ petition was companytested by the Union of India, inter alia, on the ground that under rule 8 of the rules promotion from Supervisor Grade A to Chargeman Grade II was to be made on the basis of selection.
K. Ramamurthi and V.J. Francis for the Appellants.
The argument based on Article 16 was also rejected.
v. Union of India and Ors.
441/81 was heard by this Court the circular dated January 20, 1966 and the legal companysequences flowing therefrom were number brought to the numberice of this Court by the learned companynsel for the respondents or the same were number properly emphasised.
Supervisor, Grade A who had been promoted before the companying into force of the circular dated January 20, 1966 stood in a class separate from those whose promotions were to be made thereafter.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
This appeal by K.K.M. Nair and others is against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal Jabalpur.
The appellants were, thus, given deemed dates of promotion to the post of Chargeman, Grade 11 from the date when they companypleted two years of service as Grade A and companysequent seniority in the other higher grades.
They were promoted to Chargeman Grade I during the years 1979/80.
The Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, thus, dismissed the writ petition on merits.
441 of 1981 may also be granted the same relief which was granted to the petitioners in the writ petitions before the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The findings of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in its judgment dated 4th April, 1983 thus stand approved by this Court.
The appellants have raised an argument based on the above quoted observations of this Court in Palurus case which we shall companysider at a later stage in this judgment.
Appellants 1, 6, 11 and 12 were appointed Supervisor Grade B during the years 1961/62.
Rules 3 1 , 8 and 12 of the rules which are relevant are reproduced hereunder 3 1 .
Appellants 1 to 11 were promoted as Chargeman, Grade II on different dates during 1972/77.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH, J. Special leave granted.
The DG issued circular dated November 6, 1962 first circular which is reproduced hereunder G.O.F. has decided that Diploma holders serving as Supervisor A Tech Supervisor B Tech and in equivalent grades should be treated as follows All those Diploma holders who have been appointed as SupervisorB Tech and in equivalent grades should on companypletion of one years satisfactory service in ordnance factories be promoted to Supervisor A Tech and in equivalent grades.
Against th aforesaid judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated 4th April, 1983 Special Leave Petitions Civil Nos.
441 of 1981 was preferred in this Court.
Civil Appeal No.
Narayan B. Shetye, K. Lahiri, Vineet Kumar, Ms. Sushma Suri, Ms. Kitty Kumar Mangalam, S.N. Terdo and B.K. Prasad for the Respondents.
This appeal is a sequel to the checkered litigation, over a period of two decades, between members of the Indian Ordnance Factories Class III Service the Service .
5987 92 of 1986 were filed in this Court by the Union of India and were dismissed on 28th July, 1986.
1690 of 1993.
It is necessary to lay down the factual matrix which led to the passing of the order dated February 20/25, 1987 by the DG.
217 of 1987.
They were further promoted to the post of Assistant Foreman during the period 1981 to 1984.
Against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court Civil Appeal No.
We may companye back to the point of time when the Director General issued the order dated February 20/25, 1987 giving ante dated seniority to the appellants in various grades of the service.
The first circular was issued in the year 1962.
Against the aforesaid judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court special leave petitions Civil Nos.
