New Delhi: A person appointed temporarily to a post in government service without recourse to recruitment rules cannot be said to be in service until his appointment is regularised. It is only from the date on which his services are regularised can the appointee claim seniority over others, the Supreme Court has held.

Only for substantial posts

A Bench consisting of Justices A.R. Lakshmanan and Justice Altamas Kabir held that appointments made contrary to the rules were merely fortuitous and would not confer any seniority benefit. The Bench agreed with the appellants' submission that seniority in a cadre could only be in respect of substantial posts and not for temporary posts.

K. Madalaimuthu and another person belonging to the Tamil Nadu Registration Services were working as Assistant Inspectors-General of Registration. They were directly recruited for the post of District Registrar. In 1981, 1982 and 1984 the State government prepared a temporary list of officers who were fit for appointment by transfer to the post of District Registrar, pending finalisation of the regular list in consultation with the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. Subsequently these appointees were regularised in service. The grievance of the appellants was that while preparing the seniority list, they were fixed below those who were promoted. Both the State Administrative Tribunal and the Madras High Court rejected their petitions challenging the fixation of inter se seniority. Allowing the appeal against the High Court judgment, the apex court Bench said, "a direct recruit takes his seniority from the date on which he starts discharging the duty of the post borne on the cadre, while a temporary appointee appointed dehors the rules or on an ad hoc basis or to a fortuitous vacancy gets seniority from the date of regular appointment."

In the instant case, the authorities, on the strength of several government orders giving retrospective effect to regularisation of the services of the promotees, took the date of their initial appointment as the starting point of their seniority. Such a course of action was erroneous and contrary to the well-established principles on determination of seniority, the Bench held. It directed the Tamil Nadu Government to re-determine the seniority of the appellants, after reckoning the starting point of seniority of such promotees from the date of regularisation of their services.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail