5396/2002 and some of the Departmental Promotees ACSOs, namely, Shri K.S. Dhingra and Smt.
62/2003 and C.W.P. No.
W.P. No.
Ammini Rajan Ors.
Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the AFHQ DRs Civil Service Officers Association filed Writ Petition No.
Some of the ACSO DPs , namely, Smt.
The petition filed by Smt.
The Third Schedule further provides that substantive appointment to 75 of the substantive vacancies shall be made in order of seniority of the temporary officers of the grade, who have companypleted the period of probation subject to the rejection of unfit.
After the companystitution of the Central Administrative Tribunal in the year 1985, the writ petition was transferred to the Tribunal and was numbered as T.A. No.
3/1978 titled as M.G. Bansal Ors.
The AFHQ Civil Services DR Gazetted Officers Association and others filed O.A. No.
1356/1997 with further direction to the respondentUnion of India to determine the issue of seniority in accordance with the judgment of the Tribunal in TA No.
The High Court directed the issue of seniority to be determined as it was done prior to Smt.
When the direct recruits were inducted in the service, they were placed above departmental promotees who had been promoted much earlier.
It appears from the record that on 8th November 1989, the Union of India and some DR Officers filed two Special Leave Petitions before this Court against the order of the Tribunal dated 2nd June 1989.
1356/1997 Smt.
On 1st March 1968, the Armed Forces Headquarters Civil Service Rules, 1968 hereinafter referred to as the Rules were framed, wherein the services are classified in the following Grades Senior Administrative Grade Director Selection Grade Senior Civil Staff Officer Joint Director Civil Staff Officer Deputy Director Assistant Civilian Staff Officer Section Officer initially designated as Superintendent Assistant Rule 16 of the said Rules deals with the seniority, which provides that the relative seniority of the direct recruit and promotees shall be regulated in accordance with the provisions made in this behalf in the Third Schedule.
Ammini Rajans case was decided by the Tribunal.
1384 OF 2008 Arising out of S. L. P. C No.4545 of 2007 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
The usual question as regards determination of inter se seniority between Direct Recruits DRs and Departmental Promotees DPs once again falls for companysideration in these two appeals by special leave, therefore, for the sake of companyvenience, they are being heard and decided by this companymon judgment.
62/2003 and order dated 15th January, 2007 in C.W.P. No.
5396/2002 and C.W.P. No.
v. Union of India Ors.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
18073/2005 in the High Court of Delhi.
The Tribunal by its order dated 2nd June, 1989 disposed of the said petition holding that the quota prescribed in the Rules has number broken down and the seniority between the direct recruits and promotees regularly appointed promoted within their respective quota should be determined by the length of the companytinuous officiation in the grade of ACSOs from their respective appointment to the substantive vacancies under Third Schedule.
The Tribunal by its order dated 1st April, 2002, as numbericed above, disposed of the said O.A. with the above said directions.
18073/2005, whereby and whereunder the order dated 1st April, 2002 in O.A. No.
4458/2002 and 62/2003 respectively, whereas AFHQ Civil Services Officers filed C.W.P. No.
The Central Administrative Tribunal hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal allowed the said O.A. filed by Smt.
Based on the revised Select List in the grade of ACSOs, the claim of the applicants was that the Select List and the Seniority List for promotion to the grade of CSOs were drawn in companytravention of the directions given by the Tribunal in TA No.356/1985 CW 3/78 rendered in Shri M.G. Bansal Ors.
The Tribunal by its order dated 1st September, 2005 dismissed the said application holding that there is numberillegality in the preparation of Seniority List.
The applicants were also aggrieved by the companysequential Seniority List of ACSOs of AFHQ Civil Services prepared by the Departmental Promotion Committee for short the DPC for the years 1988 89 and 1989 90 respectively for promotion to further grade of Civilian Staff Officers CSOs .
v. Union of India Ors.
As per the Third Schedule of the Rules, all temporary vacancies in the grade of ACSO shall be filled by temporary promotion from amongst the Assistants by the method of selection.
on 20th November, 1992 and also in violation of AFHQ Civil Services Rules, 1968.
Some of the ACSOs DRs filed C.W.P. No.
The Division Bench of the High Court allowed the Writ Petition Nos.
These appeals, therefore, arise from the said judgments and orders of the High Court.
356/1985 dated 20th November, 1992.
Respondents Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. Leave granted.
4458/2002 C.W.P. No.
4058/2002 and 5396/2002 by an order dated 14.11.2006 and set aside the order dated 01.04.2002 recorded by the Tribunal in OA No.
The case of the parties is that prior to the year 1968, the AFHQ Civil Services were governed by the executive instructions as there were numberstatutory rules governing the service.
in the High Court of Delhi inter alia praying for the following reliefs Respondents have misapplied, misconstrued and misinterpreted Rule 16 7 as well as Third Schedule particularly Note 2 , which violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
1356 of 1997 Smt.
The High Court, by its impugned order dated 14.11.2006, has held that the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal in Smt.
2484/2004 before the Tribunal.
The said placing in the seniority list was done irrespective of the date of appointment of the direct recruits and they companyld number be positioned higher than the Departmental Promotees.
356/1985.
4458/2002 filed by the DPs were dismissed and CWP No.18073/2005 was disposed of on 15.01.2007 on the basis of direction in the above said writ petitions.
Ammini Rajan, filed W.P. Nos.
1385 OF 2008 Arising out of S. L. P. C No.5853 of 2007 AFHQ Officers Association Ors.
These appeals are directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Delhi dated 14th November, 2006 in W.P. No.
v. Union of India Ors.
4058 of 2002, the Union of India filed separate Writ Petition No.
Appellants Versus Union of India Ors.
4058/2002 C.W.P. No.
