4 was granted seniority with effect from 7.10.1972 when he was appointed on deputation as Assistant Engineer in P.W.D. Buildings and Roads Branch as stated earlier.
However, at the hearing before the Tribunal, at the very outset, learned Counsel for the petitioner made it clear that he was number challenging the absorption of Respondent No.
that the order of absorption was number valid as numberspecial circumstances had been set out or shown justifying the same and hence, there was a lacuna in the order.
4 was deputed to work with the Chandigarh Administration in its Engineering Department as an Assistant Engineer.
4 from the date he was taken on deputation, namely, 7.10.1972.
The said Notification sets out that the Chief Commissioner, Union Territory, Chandigarh, in companysulation with the Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi, is pleased to appoint Puranjit Singh as Assistant Engineer Civil , Class II, in the Engineering Department of Chandigarh Administration on buildings and roads side, by transfer from Punjab, P.W.D Buildings and Roads Branch, and that his appointment will be subject to further provisions of P.W D Class II Rules, 1965 as applicable to the Engineering Department of the Chandigarh Administration.
7.10.1972, the date of his joining as Assistant Engineer in P.W.D. Buildings Roads Branch PG NO 801 Now, therefore, in pursuance of rule 12.5 of Punjab Service of Engineers, Class II, P.W.D. Buildings and Roads Branch Rules, 1965, the Chief Commissioner, Chandigarh Administration is pleased to order the fixation of seniority of Shri Puranjit Singh as Assistant Engineer w.e.f.
From the Judgment dated 17.9.87 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in A. No.
The Notification dated 14.1.1980 granting him final seniority sets out inter alia as follows AND WHEREAS the Chandigarh Administration companysidered all the circumstances of the case and keeping the public interest in view, fixed the tentative seniority of Shri Puranjit Singh w.e.f.
4 in Special Leave Petition No.
Respondent No.
4 companyld number be granted seniority more favourably than the seniority determined after allowing him credit for the period of service rendered by him in his previous appointment as Assistant Engineer.
7.10.1972 From this it is clear that Respondent No.
4 and his appointment as an Assistant Engineer in the Chandigarh Administration was at his own request, he should be placed at the bottom of the seniority list as on the date of absorption.
The companysent of the State of Punjab as well as the approval of the Union Public Service Commission with regard to this appointment of Respondent No 4 was duly taken.
4, have companye by way of these Appeals.
4 made an application, while on deputation with the Administration of the Union Territory of Chandigarh, for absorbing him in the cadre of Sub Divisional Engineers in the Engineering Department at Chandigarh.
11877 of 1987 Puranjit Singh, the petitioner in Special Leave Petition No 11877 of 1987 was Respondent No.
Respondent No.
4 was appointed as an Assistant Engineer in the Punjab Public Works Department Irrigation Wing on PG NO 800 July 15, 1968 on selection through the Punjab Public Service Commission.
4 having been specifically given up by learned Counsel for the petitioner before the Tribunal, it was number open to the PG NO 802 Tribunal to companysider the question of validity of the absorption at all, and that as per the provisions of sub rule 5 of Rule 12 of the said Rules the Chandigarh Administration was entitled to assign a seniority to Respondent No.
On June 24 1976 the petitioner joined the Chandigarh Administration as an Assistant Engineer as a direct recruit by his selection through the Union Public Service Commission.
Curiously, although the challenge to the order absorbing Respondent No.
His request was acceded to by the Administration and by an order passed by the Home Secretary on June 17, 1978 he was absorbed in the Engineering Department as a Sub Divisional Engineer B R in the Chandigarh Administration, working on deputation in the Housing Board, Chandigarh.
4 was appointed by transfer to the Chandigarh Administration at his own request, he ought to have been placed at the bottom of the seniority list in the year of absorption and below the petitioner.
petition challenged both the order of absorption of Respondent No.
1 to 3 We propose to refer to the parties by their description in the said writ petition.
On companysideration, a tentative seniority list was circulated on November 19, 1979 inviting objections and after hearing the objections Respondent No.
The Registry is directed to register and number these petitions as Civil Appeals.
These Appeals are both directed against a judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, dated September 17, 1987.
There is numbermention of public interest or interest of the service in this order.
4 in the Chandigarh Administration and the order fixing his seniority on the ground that these orders were number in public interest or in the interest of the service.
On October 7, 1972 Respondent No.
It is against this decision that both, the Chandigarh Administration and Respondent No.
The Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition No 15073 of 1987 has been preferred by the Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh and the Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition No 11877 of 1987 has been preferred at the instance of Puranjit Singh Writ petition No.
It was, on the other hand, companytended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that, as the transfer of Respondent No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
It was submitted by them that, in view of the challenge to the order of absorption of Respondent No.
The companytention of the petitioner was that, since Respondent No.
The order absorbing him as a Sub Divisional Engineer was incorporated in a Notification dated March 1, 1979, which was duly Gazetted.
4 was granted seniority with effect from October 7, 1972, being the date of his joining as an Assistant Engineer on deputation in the P.W.D. Buildings and Roads Branch of the Chandigarh Administration.
Kapil Sibbal, G.L. Sanghi, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, P.N. Puri, R.K. Chopra and Ravinder Chopra for the Petitioners C. Mahajan and S.C. Patel for the Respondents The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KANIA, J. Special Leave granted in both the petitions.
4 in the said writ petition and Chandigarh Administration and its officers were Respondents Nos.
The said writ petition was filed by K.S Brar who is Respondent No.
4 in the service of the Chandigarh Administration was given up by the petitioner, the Tribunal came to the companyclusion, on the basis of Rule lO of the Punjab Service of Engineers, Class II, P.W.D. Buildings and Roads Branch Rules referred to hereinafter as the said Rules .
3287 of 1978 filed in the Punjab Haryana High Court was transferred to the said Tribunal and treated as T.A No T 5/CH of 1987 and it is the judgment of the Tribunal in this petition which is impugned before us.
The petitioner in the writ.
4 from a date prior to the date of his absorption in the interest of the public service and after taking into account all the circumstances of the case provided that Respondent No.
4 that the question of regularity or validity of the order of absorption was irrelevant to the question of fixation of seniority.
4 should be placed at the bottom of the gradation list of officers of his category and granted seniority from the date he was absorbed in the cadre, namely, February 9, 1979.
1 in Special Leave Petition No 15 73 of 1987 and Respondent No.
3099 and 3100 of 1988.
The Tribunal held that, as a result of this Respondent No.
T 5/CH of 1987.
4 but only the placement of the petitioner in the seniority list and the assigning of seniority to Respondent No.
