Dayanand Sharma & Ors v. Union of India & Ors

PRATEEK JALAN, J.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. JANUARY 24, 2019 "pv/hkaur"

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 01.11.2018 Pronounced on: 24.01.2019 + W.P.(C) 6989/2002 & CM Appl. 27515-27516/2018 DAYANAND SHARMA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.S.Sunil, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Rajesh Kumar & Ms.Santwana, Advocates for CBI CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN MR.JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN % 1. The present writ petition is directed against an order dated 17.04.2002 whereby the Central Administrative Tribunal [hereafter referred to as "the Tribunal"] dismissed the petitioner's application (OA No. 1061/2001) and consequently upheld the seniority list drawn by the respondent authorities for Head Constables, Assistant Sub-Inspectors (ASI), and Sub-Inspectors (SI), in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). 2. The petitioners were directly recruited as Constables in the CBI in 1975 and were thereafter promoted as Head Constables and ASI. During the pendency of proceedings before this Court, they have been further promoted as SI and thereafter as Inspectors. 3. At the relevant time, Head Constables in CBI were promoted from the post of Constables, 90% being from directly recruited Constables, and 10% being from those who held the post of Constables on deputation/transfer (subject to a qualifying examination). By an amendment to the Recruitment Rules with effect 25.07.1980, the post of Constable was made a non-selection post to be filled to the extent of 60% by promotion (failing which, deputation/transfer) and 40% by deputation/transfer. In each mode, 10% of the posts were to be filled by seniority and the balance were subject to a qualifying examination. A qualifying examination was held on 14.09.1980, as a result of which 96 Constables were promoted on 26.11.1980 and 22.01.1981. On 23.09.1985, a panel for promotion to HC was prepared from those who were eligible in the earlier panel of 1979 and 1980 but were not promoted. The recruitment rules were further amended in 1987, and promotions were again made from the list drawn in 1985. Although the petitioners had by then become eligible for promotion, they were not promoted as their names did not figure in the 1979 and 1980 panels. However, the respondents drew the seniority list of Constables on 02.05.1985 and 17.11.1988, wherein the petitioners were shown higher than those deputationists who had been absorbed as Constables in 1983 and 1985. 4. The genesis of the present controversy is in an application filed before the Tribunal by one Vikramaditya Singh, who was appointed as a Constable in the CBI on deputation in the year 1974. By an order dated 25.06.1991 passed on his application [OA No. 190/1988], the Tribunal directed re-fixation of seniority of Constables as on 09.10.1987, counting the deputationist's length of service in their parent departments. The Tribunal relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in K.Madhavan vs. Union of India [(1987) 4 SCC 566], which was pronounced on 09.10.1987 and issued the following directions: "(1) The applicant shall be deemed to have been promoted as Head Constable with effect from 9.10.87; and shall be given consequential benefits thereof within 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (2) The interim orders permitting him to appear at the qualifying examination for the post of Asstt. Sub Inspector of Police held on 6.5.89 are revoked and his results there at are set aside. (3) The respondents 1 & 2 are directed to recost the seniority of the Constables as on 9.10.87 on the basis of counting the deputationists length of service in the parent department in the same or equivalent grade for seniority in the CBI and consider their cases for promotion as Head Constable in accordance with rules in other respects, but shall not interfere with the promotions of those constables who had already been promoted before 9.10.87; and shall be undertaken only after giving reasonable opportunity to persons w