Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dealt with contempt petitions arising from non-implementation of its earlier judgment in Keshav Chandar Joshi v. Union of India, AIR 1991 SC 284, which had directed determination of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotee Assistant Conservators of Forest in Uttar Pradesh. The present contempt petitions, numbered 65, 100 and 126 of 1992, were filed by promotees and some subsequent direct recruits who complained against the State Government's fixation of their inter se seniority. The case had a background where the original writ petition (Civil) No. 626 of 1986 and later proceedings led to directions on seniority under the U.P. Forest Service Rules, 1952. The promotees argued that a regularly constituted selection committee had selected 140 candidates for appointment on August 31, 1982 for the years 1973-74 to 1979-80, entitling them to seniority from the respective years, and claimed that after 1985 the quota should be 50 per cent. The later direct recruits contended that they were appointed to substantive vacancies as held in K.C. Joshi and treating them as temporary was in utter contempt of the directions. The State, in its counter affidavit, stated that only permanent posts should be counted as substantive posts under Rules 5 and 24, and since no statutory amendment had been made, the promotee quota remained at 33-1/3 per cent, not 50 per cent. The court considered whether the State's determination was in accordance with the rules and the law laid down in K.C. Joshi. It noted that the promotees were appointed on ad hoc basis de hors the rules and their continuous ad hoc service could not count for seniority until they were appointed by the Governor to substantive vacancies. The court held that the State must find out how many substantive vacancies existed each year from 1974-75 onwards, apply the quota rule to those substantive posts, place direct recruits of each year en bloc as seniors to the promotees appointed in substantive vacancies of that year, and make similar exercises for each subsequent year. It further directed that if temporary posts were likely to continue for long, they could be treated as permanent for counting seniority unless they were likely to be abolished. The court did not treat the matter as strict contempt but found that the State Government committed a mistake in law while working out the directions. It directed the State Government to undertake a fresh exercise in the light of the above directions and complete the same within four months from the date of receipt of the order. The contempt petitions were disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Seniority - Inter se Seniority of Direct Recruits and Promotees - U.P. Forest Service Rules, 1952, Rules 5(a), 5(b), 6, 24 - The court examined whether State Government's fixation of inter se seniority complied with earlier directions in K.C. Joshi. It held that substantive appointment by Governor under Rules is prerequisite for promotee seniority; continuous ad hoc service cannot count. The State must determine year-wise vacancies and apply quota rule to substantive posts, placing direct recruits of each year en bloc above promotees. (Paras 1-5) B) Service Law - Temporary Posts and Quota - Counting of Temporary Posts for Seniority - U.P. Forest Service Rules, 1952, Rules 5, 6, 24 - The court considered whether temporary posts can be counted for seniority. It held that if temporary posts are likely to continue for long, they may be treated as permanent unless likely to be abolished; however, quota for promotees remains 33-1/3% as no statutory amendment for 50% was made. State directed to undertake fresh exercise within four months. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government's determination of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotee Assistant Conservators of Forest was in accordance with the directions issued in Keshav Chandar Joshi v. Union of India and the U.P. Forest Service Rules, 1952; whether temporary posts could be counted towards seniority; and whether the promotion quota should be 25%, 33-1/3%, or 50%.
Final Decision
Contempt petitions disposed of with directions: State Govt. to undertake fresh exercise to determine vacancies year-wise from 1974-75 onwards, apply quota rule to substantive posts, treat temporary posts as permanent if likely to continue; complete within four months.
Law Points
- Seniority of direct recruits and promotees under U.P. Forest Service Rules
- 1952 must be determined year-wise applying quota rule to substantive vacancies
- promotee seniority counts only from appointment to substantive posts
- not from ad hoc service
- temporary posts likely to continue may be treated as permanent unless likely to be abolished
- quota for promotees remains 33-1/3% in absence of statutory amendment
- direct recruits of a particular year go en bloc as seniors to promotees appointed in substantive vacancies of that year
