Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by employees of the Naval Dockyard, Mumbai, challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 26th April 2013. The Tribunal had dismissed two Original Applications filed by the petitioners, who were apprentices trained at the Dockyard Apprentice School and later absorbed as regular employees. The core issue was the determination of seniority: the petitioners argued that seniority should be counted from the date they joined the Dockyard Apprentice School, while the respondents contended that seniority should be based on the date of absorption as regular employees. The court, after reviewing the facts and the applicable Dockyard Memoranda, held that the period of apprenticeship is not considered regular service for seniority purposes. The court found that the Tribunal's decision was correct and in line with the established policies. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed, affirming that seniority is to be computed from the date of absorption.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Seniority - Absorption of Apprentices - Date of Absorption as Basis - The dispute pertained to the determination of seniority of apprentices who were absorbed as regular employees in the Naval Dockyard. The court held that seniority must be computed from the date of absorption as a regular employee, not from the date of joining the Dockyard Apprentice School, as per the applicable Dockyard Memoranda. The court reasoned that the period of apprenticeship is not counted as regular service for seniority purposes. (Paras 1-10)
B) Administrative Law - Central Administrative Tribunal - Judicial Review - Scope - The court examined the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing the Original Applications. It held that the Tribunal's decision was based on a correct interpretation of the relevant Dockyard Memoranda and did not warrant interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the date of absorption as a regular employee, rather than the date of joining the Dockyard Apprentice School, is the correct basis for determining seniority of apprentices who were subsequently absorbed as regular employees in the Naval Dockyard.
Final Decision
The Bombay High Court dismissed both writ petitions, upholding the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal and affirming that seniority is to be computed from the date of absorption as a regular employee.
Case Details
2024 LawText (BOM) (6) 186
WRIT PETITION NO. 7103 OF 2014 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.993 OF 2024 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 7104 OF 2014 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.994 OF 2024
DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
Mr. Salil Sagar, Senior Advocate a/w Sankalp Sagar, Faizal Vora, Ajeet Manwani, Prasanna Lakshmi, Avinash Manwani for the Petitioners in both the Writ Petitions. Ms. Neeta Masurkar a/w Dashrath A. Dubey for RespondentUnion of India in both the Writ Petitions.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing Original Applications regarding seniority of absorbed apprentices.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought to set aside the Tribunal's order and to have their seniority computed from the date of joining the Dockyard Apprentice School.
Filing Reason
The petitioners were aggrieved by the Tribunal's dismissal of their applications, which upheld the respondents' decision to compute seniority from the date of absorption as regular employees.
Previous Decisions
The Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed Original Application No. 180 of 2004 and Original Application No. 178 of 2004 on 26th April 2013.
Issues
Whether the date of absorption as a regular employee, rather than the date of joining the Dockyard Apprentice School, is the correct basis for determining seniority of apprentices who were subsequently absorbed as regular employees in the Naval Dockyard.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that seniority should be counted from the date they joined the Dockyard Apprentice School, as they were effectively in continuous service. The respondents contended that seniority should be based on the date of absorption as regular employees, as per the Dockyard Memoranda.
Ratio Decidendi
Seniority of apprentices absorbed as regular employees in the Naval Dockyard is to be computed from the date of absorption, not from the date of joining the Dockyard Apprentice School, as the period of apprenticeship does not count as regular service for seniority purposes.
Judgment Excerpts
Since the facts and the issues which arise for determination in both the captioned Writ Petitions are essentially the same, both Writ Petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
The Petitions impugn an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) dated 26th April 2013 by which the Tribunal has dismissed two Original Applications (“OAs”) filed by each set of the Petitioners in the captioned Writ Petitions.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed Original Applications before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which were dismissed on 26th April 2013. Aggrieved, they filed the present writ petitions before the Bombay High Court, which were heard together and dismissed by this common order.
