The appellant was regularised in service by Government Order dated 8.10.1981.
The companytesting respondents employees are only Matriculates while the appellant has Intermediate educational qualifications.
Opposite Parties 4 to 6 who came to be appointed much later than the petitioners were promoted without prejudice to the claims of their seniors Petitioners to the rank of U.D. Clerk in the year 1980, 1981 to the post of U.D. Clerk.
Intermediate, they are number entitled to rank senior to the qualified appellant.As a companysequence, the respondents approached the Tribunal.
The appellant was later appointed in 1972 73.
The question of their inter se seniority had companye up before the Government.
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, made on February 8, 1996 in Application No.6/91.
intermediate, for recruitment to the post of L.D.C in the district and subordinate offices.
4.2.71 read with Finance Department Resolution No.90F. dt.
On their promotion as per the companyditions, Opposite Parties 4 to 6 were reverted to the post of D. Clerk in the year 1981.
The Government in its order dated February 4, 1971 prescribed the minimum educational qualification, viz.,
On the basis of their educational qualifications, the Government have issued instructions for fixation of their inter se seniority as under All L.S. Clerks who have passed Matriculation or any equivalent examination shall be deemed to have validly and regularly recruited and appointed as such and they shall number be required to pass the Recruitment Examination or any special qualifying test in lieu thereof prescribed by Government.
Even on the ground that the representation of the Opposite Parties was disposed of in the year 1990.
The respondents employees were appointed to the posts of L.D.C in 1970 71.
This direction is obviously inconsistent with the orders issued by the Government as indicated above.
for the Respondents O R D E R The following Order of the Court was delivered Live granted.
From 1981 till this litigation was filed in the year 1991 petitioners are companytinuing uninterruptedly in the promotional post of U.D. Clerk and Opposite Parties 4 to 6 are companytinuing as L.D. Clerks.
with him for the appellant K. Panda, P.N. Misra, Advs.
We have heard learned companynsel on both sides.
Since the respondent employees did number possess minimum educational qualification, viz.,
