Seniority Cannot Be Claimed when the Incumbent has not even been borne in the cadre: Supreme Court of India

Seniority Cannot Be Claimed when the Incumbent has not even been borne in the cadre: Supreme Court of India

Seniority Cannot Be Claimed when the Incumbent has not even been borne in the cadre.  It has been held by the Supreme Court of India in the case of  K. Meghachandra Singh vs Ningam Siro on 19 November, 2019 by the Supreme Court of India in CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8838   OF 2019 arising out of SLP(C) No(s).17007 of 2019  CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 8836-8837 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP(C) No(s). 19568-19569 of 2019.

In an important Judgment Delivered by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in matters pertain to an inter-se seniority dispute in the Manipur Police Service Grade II Officers, Supreme Court held that Seniority Cannot Be Claimed From A Date When the Incumbent was Not Borne In Service. Salient Points of the Judgement :

“The seniority cannot be reckoned from the date of occurrence of the vacancy and cannot be given retrospectively unless it is so expressly provided by the relevant service rules. It is so because seniority cannot be given on retrospective basis when an employee has not even been borne in the cadre and by doing so it may adversely affect the employees who have been appointed validly in the meantime.”

“At this stage, we must also emphasize that the Court in N. R. Parmar (Supra) need not have observed that the selected candidate cannot be blamed for administrative delay and the gap between initiation of process and appointment. Such observation is fallacious in as much as none can be identified as being a selected candidate on the date when the process of recruitment had commenced. On that day, a body of persons aspiring to be appointed to the vacancy intended for direct recruits was not in existence. The persons who might respond to an advertisement cannot  have any service-related rights, not to talk of right to have their seniority counted from the date of the advertisement. In other words, only on completion of the process, the applicant morphs into a selected candidate and, therefore, unnecessary observation was made in N. R. Parmar (Supra) to the effect that the selected candidate cannot be blamed for the administrative delay. In the same context, we may usefully refer to the ratio in vs. Shankarsan Dash Vs. Union of India, where it was held even upon empanelment, an appointee does not acquire any right.”

“In view of the foregoing, the orders of the High Court in the Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal are upheld. The State of Manipur is accordingly directed to prepare a revised inter-se seniority list in the MPS Grade-II cadre in light of the above discussion  and the High Court’s Orders. This shall be done within 8 weeks from today. All consequential actions will follow from this judgment. It is ordered accordingly.”

Source: indiankanoon.org