Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between two constables regarding seniority in the Haryana Police. The appellant, Luxmi Devi, was appointed as a constable on 19.11.1981 and consistently outperformed the 6th respondent, Asha Rani, in various evaluations and promotions. Both were promoted to Head Constables in October 1985, with the appellant later promoted to Assistant Sub-Inspector in November 1989 and subsequently to Sub-Inspector in May 1991. The 6th respondent, despite being promoted later, was transferred to a different range and sought to revert the appellant to a lower rank after her deputation. The court found this action to be arbitrary and illegal, emphasizing that the appellant's superior performance warranted the maintenance of her seniority. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, directing the state to uphold the appellant's seniority over the 6th respondent, regardless of the temporary nature of their posts.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Seniority - Maintenance of Seniority - Not applicable to temporary posts - Court directed the state to maintain the appellant's seniority over the 6th respondent based on superior performance as an all-rounder. The court found the action of reverting the appellant to a lower rank after her deputation to be illegal and arbitrary, thus restoring her rightful position. Held that seniority should reflect performance irrespective of the temporary nature of the posts (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant's seniority over the 6th respondent should be maintained despite the latter's transfer and subsequent promotions.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, directing the state to maintain the appellant's seniority over the 6th respondent based on her superior performance.
Law Points
- seniority
- promotion
- arbitrary action
- performance evaluation
