That petition was disposed of by the High Court on the undertaking given by the State that the seniority will be fixed up soon.
Both the writ petitions, one filed by the direct recruit, Shri Gupta, CWP No.
367 and 411 of 1992.
The instant claim raised by the erstwhile members of the ministerial cadre, came to be accepted by the Administrative Tribunal vide orders dated 30.12.2003, 30.4.2004, 26.4.2004, 2.8.2004 and 14.10.2004, on the basis of the law laid down by this Court in Om Prakash Sharma v. Union of India, 1985 Supp.
Accordingly, the erstwhile members of the ministerial cadre, claimed restoration of the position of their seniority as it originally existed, with reference to such other members of the ministerial cadre who had opted for absorption into cadre of Data Entry Operators, and who had thereafter, as a matter of re amalgamation under the provisions of the TA Rules, 2003 and the STA Rules, 2003 been appointed as Tax Assistants and Senior Tax Assistants respectively.
Prior to the aforesaid numberification of the State Government Shri Gupta had filed a writ petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court which had been registered as CWP No.
ITEM NO.1B COURT NO.4 SECTION XII S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Civil Appeal No s .
pic6012 of 1986 claiming his seniority at No.
This Court granted leave and stayed the operation of the judgment in the matter of fixation of seniority.
A thereafter in the next year was found suitable as a general candidate and was picappointed to the Indian Police Service.
who have number opted for the post of Data Entry Operators and were stick on to the much higher responsible position, were put in a most disadvantageous position.
It is only the rules relating to the fixation of inter se placement of the erstwhile ministerial cadre staff and the erstwhile technical cadre staff in the restructured cadre which are challenged before the Tribunal.
5780 of 1987.
558, 538 and 909 of 2003, and a companymon order dated 30.4.2004 was passed while disposing of Original Application number.
One Shri M.L. Gupta was appointed to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer as a direct recruit on 27 8 1971, pursuant to the result of a companypetitive examination held by the Haryana Public Service Commission in December 1970.
All the above mentioned writ petitions were disposed of by the High Court of Judicature at Madras hereinafter referred to as, the High Court by a companymon judgment and order dated 13.4.2007.
In their challenge raised before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai hereinafter referred to as, the Administrative Tribunal , a companymon order dated 30.12.2003 was passed, while disposing of Original Application number.
And finally, an order dated 14.10.2004 was passed while disposing of Original Application number 71 of 2004.
40 of 1996.
So far as the validity of the Act is companycerned, the question of any usurpation of judicial power by the legislature does number arise in relation to the Irrigation Branch inasmuch as the Recruitment Rules of 1964 framed by the Governor of Punjab in exercise of power under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution which has been adapted by the State of Haryana on and from the date Haryana was made a separate State had number been companysidered by this Court number has any direction been issued by this Court.
It would be relevant to mention, that the solitary companytention raised at the hands of the erstwhile members of the ministerial cadre who had number opted for the appointment absorption into the cadre of Data Entry Operators was, that the process of bifurcation of cadres followed by the re amalgamation thereof, had adversely affected their seniority.
74 and 75.
Suppose Indian Police Service Recruitment Rules also provide reservation to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as well.
Another order dated 24.6.2004 was passed, while disposing of Original Application number 1025 of 2003.
22 instead of 72 which had been given to him under the numberification dated 29 9 1986.
The said undertaking number having been companyplied with, the said Shri Gupta approached the High Court in January 1986 by filing a companytempt petition.
10386/2013 HEARD BY HONBLE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR AND HONBLE S.A.BOBDE,JJ.
Paragraph 24 is being extracted hereunder The companytesting respondents have number challenged the entire rules relating to the restructure of the cadres and the merger integration of ministerial cadre and technical cadre before the Tribunal.
By operation of rule of reservation B and C became senior and A became junior in the Central Services.
8361, 8388, 17208, 17257, 21692 to 21694, 29468, 34708, 38622 of 2004 and Writ Petition Nos.
Reservation and roster were companyditions of recruitment and seniority was only an incidence of service.
And likewise, an order dated 2.8.2004 was passed, while disposing of Original Application number 1150 of 2003.
The legislative companypetence of the State Legislature to enact the Act had also number been assailed and in our view rightly since the State Legislature has the powers under Entry 41 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to frame law governing the companyditions of service of the employees of the State Government.
864 of 2004.
While adjudicating upon the aforesaid companytroversy, the High Court, in paragraph 24 of the impugned judgment and order dated 13.4.2007, framed the questions arising for determination.
Undoubtedly B and C, by rule of reservation, had stolen a march over A from the State Service.
1448 49 of 1993.
This judgment of the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court was challenged by the State of Haryana in the Supreme Court which has been registered as CAs Nos.
By operation of the equality of opportunity by Articles 14, 16 1 , 16 4 and 335, B and C were recruited by promotion from State Services to Central Services and were appointed earlier to A in 1980.
In September 1986 the State Government fixed the inter se seniority of the said Shri Gupta and other members of the Service and Gupta was shown at Serial No.
Can A thereafter companytend that since B and C were appointed by virtue of reservation, though were less meritorious and junior to him in the State service and gradation list would number become senior to him in the cadre as IPS officer.
The promotees also challenged the said judgment of the Division Bench in this Court which has been registered as CAs Nos.
2723, 3302 and 8606 of 2005.
5780 of 1987 were disposed of by the learned Single Judge by judgments dated 24 1 1992 and 4 3 1992, respectively, whereunder the learned Single Judge accepted the stand of the promotees and Shri Gupta was placed below one Shri O.P. Gagneja.
Two promotees had been shown at Serial Nos.
6 of 1995 and the said Ordinance was replaced by the impugned Act 20 of 1995 by the Haryana Legislature.
The promotees also filed a writ petition challenging the government order dated 24 7 1987 which was registered as CWP No.
The inter se seniority has been fixed by the impugned Rules only based on the pay and giving a go bye to all the numberms prescribed by the Apex Court.
1452 1453 of 1993.
The eligibility for recruitment to the Indian Police Service, thus, is a companydition of recruitment and number a companydition of service.
The State Government issued a fresh numberification on 24 7 1987 giving detailed reasons reaffirming the earlier seniority which had been numberified on 29 9 1986.
During the pendency of these appeals in this Court, an Ordinance was promulgated on 13 5 1985 as Ordinance No.
Those two promotees filed a writ petition challenging the fixation of inter se seniority between the direct recruits and promotees and the High Court of Punjab and Haryana by its judgment passed in May 1987 quashed the order dated 29 9 1986 whereunder the seniority of the direct recruits and promotees has been fixed and called upon the State Government to pass a speaking order assigning position in the gradation list.
The said Shri Gupta filed two appeals to the Division Bench against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, which was registered as Letters Patent Appeals Nos.
xxx xxx xxx So far as the rules dealing with Irrigation Branch are companycerned, the said rules namely the Punjab Service of Engineers Irrigation Branch Class I Service Rules, 1964 have number been companysidered earlier by this Court at any point of time.
The instant challenge was raised at the hands of the Union of India, as also, the members of the cadre of Data Entry Operators, who were merged into the cadre of Tax Assistants and Senior Tax Assistants, companysequent upon the promulgation of the TA Rules, 2003 and STA Rules, 2003.
They were also assailed through Writ Petition MP Nos.
The orders passed by the Administrative Tribunal referred to in the foregoing paragraph were assailed through Writ Petition Nos.
SCC 218.
J. Jagdish Singh Khehar J. A. Bobde New Delhi March 26, 2015.
The validity of the Act was challenged by the said Shri Gupta and pursuant to the order of this Court the said writ petition having been transferred to this Court has been registered as TC No.
462 and 639 of 2003.
9866, 20444, 20497, 26220, 26221, 35789, 35791, 41879, 46155 of 2004 12236 and 9286 of 2005 17258 and 17508 of 2006 and WPMP No.
Date 26/03/2015 These appeals were called on for judgment today.
For Appellant s Mr. K.Maruthi Rao, Adv.
6012 of 1986 and the other filed by the promotees CWP No.
Ms. K. Radha, Adv.The said Shri Gupta was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer on 17 9 1976.
The aforesaid letters patent appeals were allowed by judgment dated 27 8 1992.
