Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kallappa Gonnagar, a Junior Assistant in the O&M Division of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL), challenged the seniority list dated 02.08.2023 published by the 3rd respondent (Superintending Engineer). The petitioner was placed at Sl.No.18 in the non-Hyderabad-Karnataka Region seniority list, while respondents 4 to 9, who were appointed later under the Hyderabad-Karnataka reservation, were placed at Sl.Nos.24 to 29. The petitioner sought quashing of the endorsement dated 21.08.2023 rejecting his objections and the seniority list insofar as it placed respondents above him. The court examined the seniority list and found that the respondents were appointed after the petitioner, yet they were placed above him in the seniority list. The court held that seniority must be determined based on the date of appointment and not on reservation status. The court quashed the impugned endorsement and the seniority list to the extent it placed respondents 4 to 9 above the petitioner, and directed the respondents to revise the seniority list accordingly. The court also directed that the petitioner be placed at his correct seniority position above respondents 4 to 9.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Seniority - Reservation - Hyderabad-Karnataka Region - The petitioner challenged the seniority list placing him below respondents who were appointed later under Hyderabad-Karnataka reservation. The court held that seniority must be determined based on the date of appointment and not on reservation status, and that the respondents cannot be placed above the petitioner merely because they belong to the Hyderabad-Karnataka region. (Paras 1-10) B) Service Law - Seniority - Non-Hyderabad-Karnataka Region - The petitioner, a Junior Assistant in the non-Hyderabad-Karnataka region, was placed at Sl.No.18 while respondents from the Hyderabad-Karnataka region were placed at Sl.Nos.24 to 29. The court found that the respondents were appointed later and thus cannot be senior to the petitioner. (Paras 1-10) C) Service Law - Seniority - Reservation - The court held that reservation under the Hyderabad-Karnataka region does not entitle a person to seniority over those appointed earlier in the non-reserved category. Seniority must be based on the date of appointment. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the seniority list dated 02.08.2023 placing the petitioner at Sl.No.18 and respondents at Sl.Nos.24 to 29 is valid, and whether the respondents who were appointed later under Hyderabad-Karnataka reservation can be placed above the petitioner in the seniority list.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned endorsement dated 21.08.2023 and the seniority list dated 02.08.2023 insofar as it places respondents 4 to 9 above the petitioner, and directed the respondents to revise the seniority list accordingly, placing the petitioner above respondents 4 to 9.
Law Points
- Seniority
- Reservation
- Hyderabad-Karnataka Region
- Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India
- Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited Service Regulations
