Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mrs. Elize Mascarehnas, was appointed as a typist in the SDA cadre on 21.06.1985 in the District and Sessions Court, Kodagu District, Madikeri. On her own request, she was transferred to the Mysore Unit on 29.09.1994 and reported for duty on 17.10.1994. She was promoted to the FDA cadre on 15.11.2010. The petitioner submitted a representation seeking fixation of her seniority at the appropriate serial number in the seniority list, claiming that her seniority should be counted from her initial appointment date. The respondent, the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Mysore, rejected her representation on 27.02.2013. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the rejection order and a direction to treat her as senior to Smt. Kavery B.R., whose name appeared in the common provisional seniority list of FDA and senior typists as on 01.03.2013. The court considered the submissions of the petitioner's counsel, Sri Santhosh S. Nagarale, who argued that the petitioner's continuous service from 21.06.1985 entitled her to seniority from that date, and that the transfer on request did not break her continuity. The court held that seniority in a cadre is determined by the length of continuous service in that cadre, and a transfer on request does not affect continuity. The rejection of the representation was arbitrary and set aside. The court directed the respondent to treat the petitioner as senior to Smt. Kavery B.R. and fix her seniority accordingly, with consequential benefits. The writ petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Seniority - Fixation of Seniority - Continuous Service - The petitioner, appointed as a typist in SDA cadre on 21.06.1985, was transferred to Mysore Unit on her own request on 29.09.1994 and promoted to FDA on 15.11.2010. The court held that seniority in a cadre is determined by the length of continuous service in that cadre, and transfer on request does not break continuity. The rejection of her representation for seniority from the date of initial appointment was arbitrary and set aside. (Paras 1-3) B) Service Law - Transfer - Effect on Seniority - Transfer on Request - The court held that a transfer on request does not affect the employee's continuous service in the same cadre for seniority purposes. The petitioner's seniority in the SDA cadre should be counted from 21.06.1985, and she is entitled to be placed above Smt. Kavery B.R. in the seniority list. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, who was initially appointed as a typist in Kodagu District and later transferred to Mysore Unit on her own request, is entitled to have her seniority fixed from the date of her initial appointment in the SDA cadre, and whether the respondent's rejection of her representation was arbitrary.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 27.02.2013 passed by the respondent is quashed. The respondent is directed to treat the petitioner as senior to Smt. Kavery B.R. and fix her seniority accordingly, with consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Seniority in government service is determined by continuous length of service in a particular cadre
- not by date of promotion or transfer
- transfer on request does not break continuity of service for seniority purposes
- Karnataka Judicial Department (Recruitment) Rules
- 1978.
