Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
G V Prasad vs M/O External Affairs on 4 June, 2025
1
OA.No.1091 /2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.021/1091/2019
ORDER RESERVED ON 11.04.2025
DATE OF ORDER: 04.06.2025
HON'BLE DR. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. Mr. G.V. Prasad
s/o G. Visweswera Rao, Aged about 49 years,
Working as Assistant Superintendent,
Regional Passport Office, Vijayawada,
R/o 20-3/2-20, Vijayawada- 520 003.
2. Mr. G. Santhosh Kumar
s/o Sayyaji, Aged about 45 years,
Working as Assistant Superintendent,
Regional Passport Office, Hyderabad,
8-2-215 to 219, Adj. To Prashant Theatre,
Kummaraguda, Secunderabad.
3. Mrs. Anitha.
Aged about 48 years,
Working as Assistant Superintendent,
Regional Passport Office, Hyderabad,
8-2-215 to 219, Adj. To Prashant Theatre,
Kummaraguda, Secunderabad.
.....Applicants.
(By Advocate: K.R.K.V.Prasad)
Vs.
1. Union of India
Rep by Secretary,
Ministry of External Affairs, Patiala House Annexe,
Tilak Marg, New Delhi.
2. The Joint Secretary (PSP) & CPO,
Ministry of External Affairs,
PSP Division, Patiala House Annexe,
Tilak Marg, New Delhi.
3. Ms. Rajni Bhuddi,
Working as Assistant Superintendent,
Regional Passport Office, New Delhi.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL
AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad,
S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR
HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=
ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920
APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER=
35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77
68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@
gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
SANDHYA document
Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
2
OA.No.1091 /2019
4. Mr. Dilip Kumar,
Working as Assistant Superintendent,
Regional Passport Office, Patna.
....Respondents.
(By Advocate: Mr. R V Mallikarjuna Rao, Sr.PC for CG)
******
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL
AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad,
S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR
HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=
ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920
APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER=
35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77
68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@
gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this
SANDHYA document
Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
3
OA.No.1091 /2019
ORDER
PER: HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:
"To Quash and Set aside the Impugned OM No.CDR- II/582/08/2019 dated: 28-11-2019 issued by R-2 herein as arbitrary, illegal and in clear violation of the Apex Court judgment dt. 19-11-2019 in the case of Meg Chandra Singh v/s Ningom Siro & Others and clear violation of the applicants Fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider the applicants for promotion to the Post of Superintendent as per the Seniority List of Assistant Superintendent as 0n 01-04-2017, issued vide OM No. CDR- II/582/02/2016 dated: 09-02-2018 and pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
2. The facts of the case, in brief, as per the submissions of the applicants, are as follows:
i. Applicant-1 herein is working as Assistant Superintendent, Regional Passport Office, Vijayawada, and Applicants 2 and 3 are working as Assistant Superintendents, Regional Passport Office, Secunderabad, respectively.
Applicants herein are aggrieved by the Impugned Seniority List No.CDR-
II/582/08/2019, dated:28.11.2019, issued by R-2, in which the applicants are placed below the Direct Recruits and LDCE promotees, in clear violation of the Apex Court judgment, dt: 19-11-2019, in the case of Megchandra Singh v/s Ningom Siro & Others. The Ministry, vide OM No. CDR-II/582/2/2016, dated:
22.04.2016, had issued the Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, as on 01-04-2016, based on their date of joining and further directed the officers concerned to submit representations within 30 days. The Ministry again issued Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, as on 01-04-2017, vide OM No. Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 4 OA.No.1091 /2019 CDR-II/582/02/2016, dated: 09-02-2018, based on their date of joining and, further, directed the officers concerned to submit representations within 30 days. The Seniority of Assistant Superintendents was finalized/settled in the year 2018 and that alone should be taken into consideration for promotion to the post of "Superintendents". As per the latest judgment of the Apex Court, the issues which were settled will not be affected. The Respondents herein had already issued the Seniority list of Asst Superintendents in the years 2016 and 2018, after calling for objections from DR's and none of them had raised any such objections and the Seniority List of 2016 and 2018 was final. The Impugned Seniority List, vide O.M. No. CDR-II/582/08/2019, dated: 28-11- 2019, was issued by following the DOP&T OM No. 20011/1/2012-EstD), dated: 04.03.2014, which was based on the norms laid down in NR Parmar's case, in which it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the "initiation of recruitment process against a vacancy year would be the date of sending the requisition for filling up of vacancies to the recruiting agency in the case of direct Recruitee".
This was subsequently overruled by the Apex Court, vide judgement, dated:
19/11/2019, in the case of Megchandra Singh v/s Ningom Siro & others. After the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment of 19.11.2019, the Impugned Seniority list was issued, vide O.M. No. CDR-II/582/08/2019, dated: 28-11-2019, which is void ab initio and not valid, and, therefore, the earlier Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, as on 01.04.2017, issued vide O.M. No. CDR-
II/582/02/2016, dated: 09-02-2018, has to be taken into consideration for the purpose of consideration of the applicants for promotion to the post of Superintendents.Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 5 OA.No.1091 /2019
3. It is submitted that, earlier, Respondent-2 had issued the Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, as on 01-04-2016, vide OM No.CDR-11/582/2/2016, dated: 22-04-2016, and another Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, as on 01-04-2017, vide OM No. CDR-II/582/02/2016, dated: 09-02-2018, in which the applicants were shown at Sl. Nos. 46, 51 and 59, respectively. Their position has now been changed by following the judgment in NR Parmar's case and their seniority has been pushed down to Serial Nos. 160, 164 and 172, respectively, in the Impugned Seniority List, dated 28-11-2019.
4. It is further submitted that, in the Central Passport Organization, upto the year 2010, in the category of Assistant Superintendents (erstwhile Assistants), 75% of vacancies were recruited through seniority and 25% through department examinations and there was no entry for direct recruits. But, the Recruitment Rules were amended, vide Gazette notification under G.S.R. No.964(E), dated 13/12/2010, and, thereafter, 50% of vacancies were recruited through Seniority, 25% through Department Examinations and 25% for Direct Recruits. The qualifying service for promotion through seniority was 8 years in the Cadre of UDC (now as Sr. Passport Assistant) and 8 years of regular service in the Cadre of UDC for attending the LDCE examination. Later, the Recruitment Rules were amended, vide Gazette Notification Vide G.S.R.No.165(E), dated 10/03/2014, wherein eligibility criteria for the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination was modified from 8 years to 5 (five) years of regular service in the UDC cadre, but the criteria for promotion through seniority was not amended and it was kept as 8 years of regular service only. The crucial date for determining eligibility of officers for promotion in the case of Financial Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 6 OA.No.1091 /2019 Year-based vacancy fell on 01/04/2015. As all the applicants were promoted to the UDC category on 22/02/2007, they had completed 8 years of service as on 01.04.2015. As per the new DOP&T Circular, the Ministry conducted the DPC and promoted all the applicants as Assistant Superintendents on 22.05.2015.
5. It is further submitted that, the Ministry, vide letter, dated 03/08/2015, issued the syllabus for the LDCE examination and they also gave weightage of marks to the APAR's for the years 2012-13 and 2013-14. Later, the Ministry, issued letter, dated: 24/08/2015, wherein they announced the date of examination, as 30/08/2015. It was clearly mentioned that those who are eligible as UDCs may attend the examination. As the petitioners had already become Assistant Superintendents, the Ministry did not give an opportunity to them to appear at the examination and did not even issue hall tickets. The Limited Departmental Examination was held on 30.08.2015 and the results were declared on 09.10.2015. On the basis of the LDCE, 85 selected candidates were promoted as Assistant Superintendents, on 12/10/2015. Thereafter, some DR's were recruited as Assistant Superintendents, who joined at the Central Passport Organization on various dates from December, 2015, onwards. Since the seniority of Assistant Superintendents had been finalized/ settled in the year 2018, that alone should be taken into consideration for promotion to the post of "Superintendents". While issuing the Draft Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, vide OM No. CDR-II/582/08/2019, dated: 07 August, 2019, as on 01-01-2019, the Ministry stated that a number of representations were received from Direct Recruit (DR) Assistant Superintendents, recruited through the SSC (CGL-2014), claiming seniority over the Assistant Superintendents, Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 7 OA.No.1091 /2019 promoted in May, 2015, from the feeder grade and through the LDCE, held in August, 2015. The matter was, thus, referred to the DoP&T for their advice. In the above said letter, they mentioned that the LDCE Examination was held against 2014-15 Vacancies and the DR's also were appointed for the same year.
As per the Rota Quota rule, they have arranged DRs and LDCE in the ratio of 1:1, and the petitioners have been placed below DR's and LDCE promotees as the DPC was held for the vacancies for the year 2015-16 and the impugned seniority list, dated: 28-11-2019, as on 01/01/2019, has been prepared strictly in compliance with OM No.20011/1/2008-Estt. (D), dated: 11.11.2010, & OM No. 20011/1/2012-Estt, dated: 04-03-2014, of the DoPT.
6. It is further submitted that, as per the DOPT OM No. 22011/3/98-Estt(D), dated: 17/09/1998, the crucial date for determining eligibility of officers for promotion, in the case of Financial Year-based vacancy year, would fall on the 1st of January, immediately preceding such vacancy year. As per the above Circular, for the vacancies of the Financial Year 2014-2015, for LDCE Examination, as stated by the Ministry, the crucial date for determining eligibility of officers for promotion would be 01/01/2014. As per the revised Recruitment Rules, vide Gazette Notification under G.S.R. No.964(E), dated:
13/12/2010, the eligible service for appearing for departmental examination, for the Financial Year 2014-15, would be eight years. Later, the Recruitment Rules were amended, vide Gazette notification G.S.R. No.165(E), dated 10/03/2014, wherein the eligibility criteria for Limited Departmental Competitive Examination was five years of regular service. Had the examination been held for the vacancies of 2014-15, the crucial date for determining eligibility would Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 8 OA.No.1091 /2019 be 01/01/2014 and only the Recruitment Rules, vide Gazette Notification under G.S.R. No.964(E), dated: 13/12/2010, would be applicable, since the Recruitment Rules, vide Gazette Notification G.S.R. No.165 (E), dated 10/03/2014, came into effect at a later date. It clearly indicates that the Ministry has mixed up the rules contained in the Recruitment Rules, 2010, and the Recruitment Rules, 2014, while drawing up the Draft Seniority List-2019. It is also submitted that, as per Part II of the "Guide Lines on Departmental Promotion Committee in Consolidated Form", by the DOP&T, vide O.M. No.22011/5/86-Estt(D), dated 10/04/1989, it was clearly mentioned that a vacancy shall be filled in accordance with the recruitment rules in force on the date of vacancy, unless rules made, subsequently, have been expressly given retrospective effect. As per the above OM, it is crystal clear that the Recruitment Rules, as on 01/01/2014, will be applicable to the LDCE examination, as the examination was held for the vacancy year 2014-15 and the Recruitment Rules, as on 2010, would be applicable to the LDCE. Since amendments to recruitment rules normally have only prospective application, and the existing vacancies should be filled as per the recruitment rules in force.
Applying the Recruitment Rules of 2010, the LDCE Candidates are clearly ineligible to appear in the examination for promotion from UDC to Assistant Superintendent for the vacancy years 2014 and 2015, as none of the UDCs, who appeared in the examination, had completed the qualifying service of 8 years.
7. It is also submitted that, in the office Memorandum, dated 07.08.2019, the Ministry clearly stated that the draft Seniority, as on 01.01.2019, had been prepared, based on DOPT Instructions and Guidelines on Seniority, issued vide Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 9 OA.No.1091 /2019 OM No.20011/1/2008 Estt(D), dated 11.11.2010, and OM. No.20011/1/2012- Estt. (D), dated 04.03.2014, but the Ministry had misinterpreted the OM No.28011/6/76-Estt.(D), dated 24.06.1978, which was included in the DOPT Instructions and Guidelines on Seniority Issue, vide OM No.20011/1/2008 Estt(D), dated 11.11.2010, wherein it was clearly mentioned that the starting point in the roster should be that mode of recruitment, prescribed in the Recruitment Rules, for which selection process had been completed first. The date of completion of the selection process for promotion, if UPSC is not associated or its formal concurrence is not required, is the last date of the DPC meeting, but in the case of Limited Department Examination, it will be the date of announcement of results. In the case of LDCE Promotees, the examination was conducted on 30.08.2015 and the results were declared on 19.10.2015.
But, in the case of promotees through seniority, the DPC was conducted earlier and promotion was given on 22.05.2015, much prior to the date of announcement of the results of the LDCE Examination. As per the above circular, all the promotes, who were promoted as Assistant Superintendents on 22.05.2015, have to be given seniority over the promotees, who qualified the LDCE examination on 09.10.2015 and were promoted as Assistant Superintendents on 12.10.2015. Aggrieved by the above draft seniority, applicants submitted representations, on 21.08.2019, but the Ministry rejected the plea, vide order No.CDR-II/582/02/2016, dated 21.11.2019, giving the same reasons for fixation of Seniority.
8. Applicants have relied upon the judgment, dated 19.11.2019, of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Megchandra Singh v/s Ningom Siro & Others, Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 10 OA.No.1091 /2019 wherein the Apex Court has held that a person cannot claim seniority from a date prior to his date of joining or promotion. It has also done away with the concept of vacancy year and has overruled the judgment given in NR Paramar v/s Union of India, which was purported to be the basis and methodology adopted for issuing the impugned seniority list on 28.11.2019, by placing the applicants below the Direct Recruits and LDCE promotees, by altering the settled Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, issued in the years 2016 and 2018, wherein the applicants were shown at Sl. Nos. 46, 51 and 59. However, by following the judgment in NR Parmar's case, they were pushed down to Serial Nos. 160, 164 and 172, respectively, in the impugned seniority list, dated 28.11.2019, which is in clear violation of the Apex Court Judgment supra, according to which, the seniority issues which were settled will not be affected.
The respondents herein have already issued the Seniority List of Asst.
Superintendents in the year-2016, after calling for objections from DR's, and none of them raised any objections and, thus, the Seniority List of 2016 was final.
9. It is contended by the applicants that the respondents herein were going to hold the DPC for the purpose of promotions to the post of Superintendents and the applicants, being seniors, are entitled to be considered for promotion as Superintendents, as per the Seniority List of the years 2016 and 2018. The Impugned Seniority List issued by R-2, vide OM No.CDR-II/582/08/2019, dated 29-11-2019, is liable to be set aside as illegal, arbitrary and in clear violation of the Apex Court judgment, dt.19.11.2019, in the case of Megchandra Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 11 OA.No.1091 /2019 Singh, and also being in clear violation of the applicants' fundamental rights, guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
10. Among the grounds, the following points have been made / reiterated by the applicants:-
i. The impugned Seniority List No.CDR-II/582/08/2019, dated 28.11.2019, issued by R-2, in which the applicants are placed below the Direct Recruits and LDCE promotes, in clear violation of the Apex Court judgment, dt.19.11.2019, in the case of Megchandra Singh v/s Ningom Siro & Others, overturned the seniority settled as on 01.04.2016 as well as 01.04.2017, based on the date joining by the Assistant Superintendents. The Seniority of Assistant Superintendents, finalized/settled in the year 2018, alone should be taken into consideration for promotion to the post of Superintendents.
ii. In the case of promotees through seniority, the DPC was conducted earlier and promotion was given on 22.05.2015, much prior to the date of announcement of the results of the LDCE Examination. As per the above circular, all the promotees who have been promoted as Assistant Superintendents, on 22.05.2015, have to be given seniority over the promotees who qualified the LDCE Examination on 09.10.2015 and were promoted as Assistant Superintendents on 12.10.2015. Aggrieved by the above draft seniority, applicants submitted representations on 21.08.2019, but the Ministry rejected their plea, vide Order No. CDR-
II/582/02/2016, dated 21.11.2019.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYADN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 12 OA.No.1091 /2019 iii. As per the latest judgment of the Apex Court, the issues which were already settled will not be affected. The respondents herein already issued the Seniority List of Asst. Superintendents in the year 2016 and 2018 after calling for objections from DR's and none of them raised any such objections and, thus, the Seniority List of 2016 and 2018 was final.
The DOP&T OM No.20011/1/2012-Estt(D), dated 04.03.2014, was issued in compliance with the norms laid down in NR Parmar's case, which has been overruled by the Apex Court, vide the judgment, dated 19.11.2019, in the case of Megchandra Singh v/s Ningom Siro & others.
Therefore, the Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, as on 01.04.2017, issued vide OM No.CDR-II/582/02/2016, dated 09.02.2018, has to be taken as the basis for the purpose of consideration of the applicants for promotion to the post of Superintendents. Applicants, being senior, are entitled to be considered, by the DPC for promotion as Superintendents, as per the Seniority List of the year 2018. The Impugned Seniority List, issued by R-2, vide OM No. CDR-
II/582/08/2019, dated 28-11-2019, is liable to be set aside.
11. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have appeared through their counsel and filed their counter against of the applicants, arguing as follows:
i. The draft seniority list of Assistant Superintendents working in the Central Passport Organisation, as on 01.01.2019, was circulated, vide OM, dated 07.08.2019. All the representations were duly disposed of, while carrying out rectification/correction, wherever required, and then the Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents (Non-Gazetted, Group-B Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 13 OA.No.1091 /2019 officials) was circulated, vide OM, dated 28.11.2019. The OM, dated 28.11.2019, was legal and issued as per the extant rules and guidelines and had nowhere violated anybody's Fundamental Rights.
ii. Following the earlier Seniority List, as on 01.04.2017, the Ministry had received a number of representations from Direct Recruit (DR) Assistant Superintendents, recruited through the Staff Selection Commission (Combined Graduate Level-2014){SSC(CGL-2014)}, claiming seniority over Assistant Superintendents, promoted in May, 2015, from the feeder grade and through the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE), held in August, 2015. The matter was, referred to the Departmental of Personnel and Training (DoPT) for their advice. A draft Seniority List, as on 01.01.2019, was prepared, based on the DOPT "Instructions and Guidelines on Seniority", issued vide OM No. 20011/1/2008-East. (D), dated 11.11.2010, & O.M.No20011/1/2012-Estt (D), dated 04.03.2014. The following methodology was adopted while fixing the seniority in the draft Seniority List of Assistant Superintendents, as on 01.01.2019:
(a) The vacancy year of the Direct Recruit (DR) and the LDCE promoted Assistant Superintendents was 2014; therefore, the inter-se seniority between the Assistant Superintendents recruited through SSC CGL-2014 and LDCE 2015 was drawn by rotation of the vacancies available, between the DR and LDCE, which is based on the quota (percentage) of vacancies reserved for DRs and LDCE in the Recruitment Rules, for the vacancy year 2014-15, in the ratio of 1:1, in the order given in the Recruitment Rules of the Central Passport Organization.Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 14 OA.No.1091 /2019
(b) As the vacancy year of the Assistant Superintendents promoted in May, 2015, from the feeder post, was 2015-2016, they were placed en-bloc below the Assistant Superintendents recruited through SSC CGL-2014 and LDCE-2015.
iii. It is further submitted that the process of conducting LDCE started in the Year 2014, i.e., immediately after revision of the RRs, notified vide GSR 165 (E), dated 04.03.2014, to fill up the vacant posts of Assistants, numbering 85, available for LDCE against the vacancy year 2014-15.
Initially, the SSC was requested to conduct the LDCE. However, it was subsequently decided to hold the exam through an outsourced agency, in consultation with the DoPT/SSC. It is emphasized that the applicants have not provided any document in support of their claim that they were not allowed to appear in the LDC Examination. On the other hand, the Ministry, vide its letter No.CDR-II/582/2/2015, dated 04.08.2015, has clarified that appearing in the LDCE-2015 was to be the sole decision of the individuals. Further, they should have approached the Ministry, if they were not issued the Hall Ticket. Their claim cannot be verified at this belated stage.
iv. According to the respondents, the date of joining has never been the basis for fixing the inter-se seniority in the Central Passport Organisation, Ministry of External Affairs. It is fixed as per the instructions/guidelines issued by the DoPT from time to time. The Recruitment Rules (RRs) only indicate the mode of recruitment and its percentage, if recruitment is through more than one method.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYADN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 15 OA.No.1091 /2019 v. Respondents prayed that the OA be dismissed with costs, since, in view of the facts and circumstances stated above, the applicants are not entitled to any relief.
12. Heard both sides, and perused the material on record.
13. Before we take up analysis of the pleadings, the background of this OA needs to be considered, as the OA has been remitted back by the Hon'ble High Court, setting aside the order, dated 08.10.2020, passed by this Tribunal, in the present OA.
14. On 19.12.2019, in this OA, the Tribunal had passed an Interim Order, of which the relevant paras are extracted below:
"3. This case is regarding promotion of the applicant from the cadre of Assistant Superintendent to Superintendent. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement dated 19.11.2019 in K. Meghachandra Singh & Others vs Ningam Siro & Others is applicable prospectively. However, the respondents have revised the seniority list on 28.11.2019, which is not in tune with the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the applicant apprehends that promotions may be effected based on the revised seniority list dated 28.11.2019. Hence, the learned counsel for the applicant prayed that the promotions may be deferred till the O.A. is disposed of.
"4. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the respondents are not likely to consider the issue of promotion from Assistant Superintendent to Superintendent in the near future. However, as the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in regard to seniority are to be gone into in detail and the issue has to be decided, if not the applicant would be put to irreparable loss in respect of promotion. Balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant.
"5. As a prima facie case has been made out, the respondents are directed not to effect any promotions to the post of Superintendent till the O.A. is disposed of."Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 16 OA.No.1091 /2019
15. In between, MA/913/2021 was filed with a prayer to direct the official respondents not to effect further promotions to the post of Senior Superintendent in pursuance of the order of promotion, dt. 31.12.2020, granted to the post of Superintendent, pending finalization of the OA. This Tribunal issued the following order, on 17.03.2022:
"2. This matter was decided by this Tribunal finally. Before that, as an interim order, this Tribunal directed the respondents not to effect further promotions to the post of Senior Superintendent which was ultimately merged with the final order passed by this Tribunal. The department went in appeal and the Hon'ble High Court remanded the matter with a direction to decide the seniority position vis-a-vis earlier seniority list in terms of judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in K. Meghchandra Singh's case.
3. Notices were issued in MA/913/2021. Sri R.V. Mallikarjuna Rao, learned Senior Panel Counsel appeared on the last occasion and sought time. Today he is absent. Sri A. Vijaya Bhaskar Babu represents the learned Standing Counsel and seeks one day's adjournment. We are not inclined to grant the same for the reason that if the department gives further promotions, the right of the applicant will be prejudiced.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this Tribunal issued notice in MA and the reply is awaited. In the interrugnum period, respondents have effected promotions to the post of Senior Superintendent. Hence, we hereby order that the said promotions shall be subject to the outcome of this O.A. MA/913/2021 is disposed of."
16. MA/336/2020 of the respondents, for vacating the interim order was disposed of along with the OA, by the Tribunal, on 08.10.2020, as follows:
"7.I. The main issue under dispute is that the seniority of the applicants, which was already settled should not be disturbed is the contention of the applicants. The respondents claim that while fixing the seniority of the Assistant Superintendents in the year 2016 and 2018 many objections were received. In this context, it is to be observed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Meghachandra Singh case delivered on 19.11.2019 has observed that the seniority of an employee who is a direct recruit shall be reckoned from the date of his being born in the cadre of the organization.Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 17 OA.No.1091 /2019 Further, it was also observed in the said judgment that the seniority fixed earlier to the judgment shall not be unsettled. Applicants are only praying that the seniority which was fixed in 2016 & 2017 be adopted for promotion to the next higher cadre. The law applicable, to the applicants in respect of fixing the seniority in the cadre of Asst. Supdt., at the relevant point of time shall be made applicable; following the well laid down principle that settled seniority is not unsettled.
II. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the number of vacancies in Superintendent cadre is more than the number of candidates that are available for promotion. Hence, they be permitted to effect promotions first and thereafter, allow them to revisit the issue of seniority in view of the heavy work load. The Ld. Applicant Counsel submitted that he has no objection for the promotions to be effected but the seniority as claimed be protected. Though we understand that the respondents would like to effect promotions at the earliest so that the work does not suffer, however, they cannot do what is not permitted under law. Besides, in granting promotions, seniority plays a cardinal role and without finalizing seniority effecting promotions would go against the basic tenets of service law. Hence, they are directed to ensure that the law, which is applicable to the applicants, as explained above, in respect of seniority shall be applied and the seniority in Asst. Superintendent cadre be finalized. Thereafter, respondents can go for effecting promotions. To facilitate the same, interim order issued on 19.12.2019 is vacated. The time line fixed to comply with the direction is 3 months from the date of the receipt of the order.
III. With the above directions, the OA is disposed. MA No.366/2020 for vacating the interim order is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs."
17. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the OA approached the Hon'ble High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, vide WP. No.22811/2020, challenging the order, dt. 08.10.2020, of CAT in OA/1091/2019. The Hon'ble High Court was pleased to take up IA No.1 of 2020 in the WP and pass interim orders on 31.12.2020, as follows:
"IA No.1 of 2020Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the order dated 08/10/2020 in O.A.No.020/01091/2019 with ΜΑ:Νο.366/2020 on the Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 18 OA.No.1091 /2019 file of the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, pending disposal of WP 22811 of 2020, on the file of the High Court xxxxx ORDER:
Heard learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the petitioners, who submits that the Tribunal without setting aside the final seniority list, dated 01.01.2019, disposed of the O.A.020/0109/2019 with M.A.No.366 of 2020 vide order dated 08.10.2020 and now there are more posts out of the candidates available and when there are without sufficient number of officers, it is being difficult for them to issue passports to the citizens within the timeframe. The amount of work is mounting on the officers and the Department is unable to cope up with the issuance of the passports which is effecting the rights of the citizens to travel abroad.
On the other hand, Sri K.R.K.V.Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the seniority list is finalized in the year 2016 and 2018 and what the tribunal observed that without disturbing the seniority, promotions can be made. He also submits that the promotions are to be made to the next cadre basing on the Seniority list.
Though the learned counsel for the respondent has filed two seniority lists, dated 25.04.2016 and 28.11.2018 and a reading of the same goes to show that they are not final seniority lists. It is mentioned in the office memorandum, dated 28.11.2019 that the final seniority list is made on 01.01.2019. Though the same is questioned, the tribunal has not set aside the same and the applicants are not before this Court. As long as final seniority list operates, the same has to be followed unless set aside.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, to safeguard the rights of the applicants as well as the exigencies of the petitioner/Department, the petitioner/department is permitted to make promotions in terms of final seniority list, dated 01.01.2019 since it is stated that there are more posts than available candidates. The promotions made will be subject to further orders and parties cannot claim any equities in respect of seniority. This arrangement is purely made due to the exigency. The seniority among the promoted candidates can be worked out later if any dispute arises."
18. The Writ Petition was finally disposed of , vide orders, dated 15.11.2021. The main portions of the order are extracted below:
".4. Having prima facie found that the determination of seniority list upsetting the seniority positions earlier granted was not in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra Singh & others Vs. Ningam Siro & others'. dated
19.11.2019, the learned Tribunal directed application of law in respect of seniority as applicable to the applicants, as referred to in the order, and seniority in the cadre of Assistant Superintendents be finalized accordingly and only thereafter. respondents should go for affecting promotions. While disposing of the O.A., the Tribunal vacated the Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 19 OA.No.1091 /2019 interim order. Challenging the said decision of the Tribunal, the Union of India preferred this writ petition.
5. As briefly noted above, petitioners are aggrieved by the seniority list dated 28.11.2019. Even though the Tribunal made observations on the validity of seniority list by referring the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra Singh's case, without deciding the validity of said seniority list disposed of the said O.A., with the directions noted in the paragraph No.7 (ii) of the order.
6. This fact was also noticed by this Court, when the Court permitted the Union of India to effect promotions based on the final seniority list impugned before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
7. It is also not clear from the reading of the order about serving of notice on respondent Nos.3 and 4, who were assigned higher seniority over the applicants. Learned counsel appearing for respondents Nos. 1 to 3 herein, is also not very clear about service of notice on them.
From the order against which this writ petition is filed, it is seen that the Tribunal granted interim order on 19.12.2019 and the Union of India moved the application to vacate the said interim order and O A was disposed of on 08.10.2020. The order of the Tribunal is silent on whether the notices were taken out on respondent Nos.3 and 4 before the Tribunal.
8. Assuming that the contentions urged by learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 are valid, these contentions require consideration by the Tribunal, after affording due opportunity to the Union of India and persons who are shown above the applicants, in the final seniority list and then only the issue of seniority can be effectively resolved. Since the Tribunal has not adjudicated on merits of the claim of the applicants in the presence of all parties and only disposed of O.A., with certain observations, without even setting aside the seniority list, we are inclined to set aside the order of Tribunal and remand the matter to the Tribunal for consideration of the issues urged in the O A on merits, after affording due opportunity to the Union of India and the affected parties.
9. The Court is also informed that pursuant to the interim order of this Court dated 31.12.2020, promotions were effected based on the seniority list impugned before the Tribunal. It is needless to observe that all those promotions shall abide result of the O.A.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 sought to contend that based on these promotions there is every likelihood of making further promotions to the next higher cadre. The Court is not inclined to express any opinion on this aspect and leaves it open to respondent Nos. 1 to 3, to urge before the Tribunal. He also submits that on 13.08.2021, the Department of personnel issued Office Memorandum which supports the contention of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein. It is also open to the respondents 1 to 3 to raise the same plea before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed."
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYADN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 20 OA.No.1091 /2019 Thus, the matter is before this Bench, for decision, after remand of the case back to CAT.
19. In the meantime, certain developments were reported and the Tribunal passed, on 17.03.2022, direction in MA/913/2021, as follows:
".....4. In the interregnum period, respondents have effected promotions to the post of Senior Superintendent. Hence, we hereby order that the said promotions shall be subject to the outcome of this O.A. Accordingly, MA/913/2021 is disposed of.
20. As per the observations of the Hon'ble High Court, at Para (7) of the order, dt.
15.11.2021, in WP No. 22811/2020, clarity was lacking whether notices was taken out on Respondent Nos. 3 and 4, in the OA, who were assigned higher seniority over the applicants. In the same order, the Hon'ble High Court has also observed, at Para (8), as follows:
"8....Since the Tribunal has not adjudicated on merits of the claim of the applicants in the presence of all parties and only disposed of O.A., with certain observations, without even setting aside the seniority list, we are inclined to set aside the order of Tribunal and remand the matter to the Tribunal for consideration of the issues urged in the OA on merits, after affording due opportunity to the Union of India and the affected parties."
In this regard, this Bench recorded in its docket order, dt. 30.10.2024, that:
"The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, he has served notices to the Private Respondents by Registered Post and the tracking report shows that the notices were duly served upon them."
Thus, the requirement for granting opportunity to all the concerned parties has been duly fulfilled.
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYADN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 21 OA.No.1091 /2019
21. Now, we come to the contentions of the parties. The basic issue is whether the two Seniority Lists, issued prior to the impugned list, vide the OM, dt.
28.11.2019, can be superseded by the subsequent Seniority List. The Seniority list, as on 01.04.2016, of Officers in Group-B (Gazetted & Non-Gazetted), including Assistant Superintendents in the CPO, vide MEA, CVP Division, OM, dt. 22/25 April, 2016, was communicated, calling for information on factual errors, if any, within 30 days from the issue of the OM. Names of Applicant Nos. 1, 2 & 3 appear at Sl.Nos. 84, 89 and 97, respectively. On the same lines, vide OM, dt. 9th Feb, 2018, the Seniority List of officials, including Asst.
Superintendents in the Central Passport Organization, as on 01.04.2017, was communicated, featuring the names of the applicants at Sl. Nos. 46, 51 and 59, respectively. Learned Counsel for the Applicants has argued that there is every indication that these lists have gone unchallenged, as no representations were made against them. They are not shown to be in the nature of provisional lists, either. It is noted that both the OM's carry a paragraph to the following effect:
"2. The Seniority List is further subject to any judgement or order of any court of law in any case, which may have a bearing on the seniority of the officials included in the List."
It was also indicated, in both these lists, that factual error/discrepancy, if any was to be brought to the notice of the Ministry /respective officer, within 30 days, for carrying out rectification. It was categorically mentioned in the OM, dated 22/25 April, 2016: "No repeat No representations will be entertained after the said date." The OM, dated 09.02.2018, concluded as follows: "No representation will be entertained after the said period."
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYADN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 22 OA.No.1091 /2019
22. These two lists have not been set aside by any Court orders. No changes were notified, after the one month period following their issue, either. The present OA is filed with a prayer not to allow their supersession by the impugned Seniority List, dt. 28.11.2019, which followed the draft Seniority List, dt. 7th Aug, 2019.
In the OM, dt. 07.08.2019, communicating the draft Seniority List, it is mentioned that:
"2. The earlier Seniority List as on 01.04.2017 was issued vide Ministry's O.M. No.CDR-II/582/02/2016 dated 09.02.2018. Following which Ministry received number of representations from Direct Recruits (DR) Assistant Superintendents recruited through SSC (CGL-2014) claiming seniority over Assistant Superintendents promoted in May, 2015 from feeder grade and through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) held in August, 2015. The matter was thus referred to Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) for their advice. Accordingly, the instant draft Seniority List as on 01.01.2019 has been prepared based on DOPT's "Instructions and Guidelines on Seniority" issued vide OM No. 20011/1/2008-Estt. (D) dated 11.11.2010 & O.M. No. 20011/1/2012-Estt.(D) dated 04.03.2014."
23. DoPT instructions, vide OM's, dt. 11.11.2010 and 04.03.2014, are cited/attached with the Reply Statement as Anns.- II and III. The latter is meant to give effect to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case on N.R. Parmar Vs. UoI & Ors. in Civil Appeal Nos. 7514-7515 of 2005, decided on 27.11.2012. The methodology adopted by the respondent Department herein, while fixing the seniority, in the draft Seniority List of Asst. Superintendents, is stated to be as per the instructions contained in DoPT OM's dt., 11.11.2010 and 04.03.2014. Para 5(i), of the OM, dt. 04.03.2014, is significant:
"(i) The cases of seniority already settled with reference to the applicable interpretation of the term availability, as contained in DoPT O.M. dated 7.2.86/3.7.86 may not be reopened."Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 23 OA.No.1091 /2019 The same OM further stipulates as below:
"7. As the conferment of seniority would be against the Recruitment Year in which the recruitment process is initiated for filling up of the vacancies, it is incumbent upon all administrative authorities to ensure that the recruitment process is initiated during the vacancy year itself. While requisition for filling up the vacancies for direct recruitment should be sent to the recruiting agency, complete in all respects, during the vacancy year itself, the timelines specified in the Model Calendar for DPCs contained in DoPT O.M. No.22011/9/98-Estt(D) dated 8.9.98 and the Consolidated Instructions on DPCs contained in O.M. No.22011/S/86-Estt(D) dated April 10, 1989 should be scrupulously adhered to, for filling up the vacancies against promotion quota." (emphasis added)
24. The Applicants had been placed at Sl.Nos. 22, 27 and 35, respectively, in the Select List for promotion, vide MEA Memo, dt. 15.06.2015. The wording of the Memo is worth a look. The same is given below:
"No.CDR-II/560/2/2015 Government of India Ministry of External Affairs C P V Division (Cadre Cell-II) New Delhi, the 15th June, 2015 MEMORANDUM Subject: Select list for promotion of UDC (Group 'C') as Assistant (Group 'B') in the Central Passport Organisation for the recruitment year 2015-16.
The following officers of the grade of UDC (Group 'C') in the Central Passport Organisation have been approved for inclusion in the select list for officiating promotion to the grade of Assistant (Group 'B') in the Central Passport Organisation.
S.No. Name Category
1. Shri Sahdev Kaushik Gen
2. Smt. Vandana Sharma Gen
3. Smt. G Umadevi Gen
4. Smt. M S Suganya SC
5. Smt. S V Zagade Gen
6. Shri Vinod Kumar Saxena Gen
7. Smt. C S Geetha Kumari Gen
8. Smt. S Preetha Gen
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 24 OA.No.1091 /2019
9. Shri V J Jacob Gen
10. Smt. P Ajirani Gen
11. Shri Gautam Sen Gen
12. Smt. Shiny James Gen
13. Smt. S Jaya Gen
14. Smt. A Mary Vijaya Gen
15. Shri Suresh Kumar Meena ST
16. Shri Surendra Singh ST
17. Shri Antaryami Roy Gen
18. Shri Biplab Mudi Gen
19. Shri Partha Kumar Das Gen
20. Shri Sunil Kumar Singh Gen
21. Smt. S Swapna Gen
22. Shri G V Prasad Gen
23. Shri Uday P Somaiya Gen
24. Smt. Sreelekha M. Nair Gen
25. Shri Vinay Mishra Gen
26. Shri Harish Khanna Gen
27. Shri G Santhosh Kumar Gen
28. Shri P M Vaghela Gen
29. Shri T Sathish Gen
30. Shri V Vijayakumar Gen
31. Shri V D Jayachandran Gen
32. Shri Sanjay Kumar Verma Gen
33. Shri M Prabakaran Gen
34. Smt. V Indra Gen
35. Smt. S Anitha Gen
2. Inclusion of an officer's name in the Select List does not confer upon him/her the right to claim promotion from any particular date. Actual promotion will be made keeping in view the exigencies of public service and availability of vacancies.
The actual date of promotion will not, however, affect the inter- se-seniority of the officers included in the Select List, which would be in the order in which they appear in the Select List.
3. All appointments made on the basis of the Select List will be subject to the decision of any Court/Tribunal in any case having a bearing on the seniority of Assistants grade. The concerned officers should also furnish an undertaking declaring that no Criminal/Court case is pending against him/her.
4. The Select List would remain operative for a period of one year with effect from the 22nd May, 2015."
25. In the meantime, the applicants were also found eligible to take the LDCE for the post of Asst. (Asst. Supdt.), as per Lr., dt. 26.12.2014, of the MEA, CPV Division, having completed 5 years of service, as on 01.01.2015, as UDC'S, and they gave their willingness for the same. Appearing for the examination was optional. Those who qualified the LDCE were allowed to join the post of Asst., w.e.f. 12.10.2015(Forenoon), vide Lr., dt. 02.11.2015. Their seniority was, Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 25 OA.No.1091 /2019 however, to be "determined later by way of their position in the Assistants Cadre of Central Passport Organization." Applicants, whose names figured in the Select List, dt. 15.06.2015, for the recruitment year 2015-2016, admittedly, did not appear at the LDCE-2015.
26. It is obvious that the Seniority Lists, as on 01.04.2016 and 01.04.2017, revised vide the impugned orders, had also gone through the process of calling for representations against errors, if any. In the light of the Apex Court Order, dt.
19.11.2019, in the case of Meghachandra Singh (Supra), the major point for consideration in this matter is the date of appointment of different batches, as Asst. Supdts. Portions of Meghachandra Singh judgment, relied upon by the applicant, are reproduced below:
"39. 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 Shankarsan Dash Vs. Union of India, where it was held even upon empanelment, an appointee does not acquire any right.
40.....We also feel that N.R. Parmar (Supra) had incorrectly distinguished the long-standing seniority determination principles propounded in, inter-alia, J.C. Patnaik (Supra), Suraj Prakash Gupta & Ors. vs. State of J&K & Ors.5 and Pawan Pratap Singh & Ors. Vs. Reevan Singh & Ors.(Supra). These three judgments and several others with like enunciation Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 26 OA.No.1091 /2019 on the law for determination of seniority makes it abundantly clear that under Service Jurisprudence, seniority cannot be claimed from a date when the incumbent is yet to be borne in the cadre. In our considered opinion, the law on the issue is correctly declared in J.C. Patnaik (Supra) and consequently we disapprove the norms on assessment of inter-se seniority, suggested in N. R. Parmar (Supra). Accordingly, the decision in N.R. Parmar is overruled. However, it is made clear that this decision will not affect the inter-se seniority already based on N.R. Parmar and the same is protected. This decision will apply prospectively except where seniority is to be fixed under the relevant Rules from the date of vacancy/the date of advertisement."
"Para: 47:........The term "Recruitment Year" does not and can not mean the year in which, the recruitment process is initiated or the year in which vacancy arises. The contrary declaration in N.R. Parmar in our considered opinion, is not a correct view."
27. Further Para 7 (v) (g) of the DoPT OM, dt. 13.08.2021, reads as under:
"7. Based on the above, it has been decided to modify the instructions relating to determination of inter se seniority between promotees and direct recruits as under:
xxx.
(v) For recruitments initiated on or after 19.11.2019 as well as for future recruitments, in addition to cases where the recruitment process has been initiated by the administrative Department/Cadre Authority before 19.11.2019, but where all appointments, subsequent to the initiation of recruitment process, could be made only on or after 19.11.2019 i.e. date of order of Apex Court, the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees shall be determined in the following manner-
xxxxx.
(g) In case, where direct recruits or promotees, as the case may be, belonging to two more selections/panel approved for promotion, join in the same year, then those who have been appointed/joined as a result of earlier selection/panel would be placed senior in the seniority list to those been appointed/joined as a result of a subsequent selection/panel.
xxxxx
8. These provisions shall come into effect from 19.11.2019 onwards."
Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYADN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 27 OA.No.1091 /2019
28. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Megha Chandra Singh and the stipulation in DoPT OM, dated 13.08.2021, above, it is abundantly clear that the cardinal principle for determining seniority in a cadre shall be the date of joining. Seniority list, as on 01.04.2016, was open to objections and, thereafter, the same was reiterated, while declaring the seniority, as on 01.04.2017, as late as in February, 2018. The date of appointment to the present grade, i.e., Assistant Superintendent, is already mentioned against each official in the list of applicants as on 01.04.2016 and 01.04.2017.
29. Thus, the date of actual promotion of the applicants, from the post of UDC to that of Assistant, must be taken into account for considering them for further promotions, as per the rules. In respect of the applicants, their ranking in the impugned order, dt.28.11.2019, cannot sustain in the eyes of law and rules and, therefore, in respect of the applicants, it is quashed and set aside.
30. The OA is allowed in the above terms. All consequential benefits shall be extended to the applicants within three months from the date of receipt of this order. Interim Order, dt.17.03.2022, in MA.No.913/2021, is subsumed in this order. No order as to costs.
(Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi) (Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne) Administrative Member Judicial Member 04.06.2025 /ps/al/Ram/ Digitally signed by PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE PANDIRL TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone= ec4f909cdddc28931061bef733616fb5c65493d17920 APALLI 9a8c2cfaa0a510742c22, SERIALNUMBER= 35e33c0d6e61374d1b11744a97265175a0ceaf8ba77 68772f41813a4eb590082, E=needhee.2@ gmail.com, CN=PANDIRLAPALLI SANDHYA Reason: I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this SANDHYA document Location:
Date: 2025.06.06 18:03:04+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0