Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Pratap Chandra Praharaj vs Revenue on 14 November, 2025
1 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022
Reserved on 24.10.2025 Pronounced on 14.11.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE SHRI SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J)
THE HON'BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A)
1. Shri Pratap Chandra Praharaj, aged about 58 years,
S/o Late Bhaskar Praharaj, Working as ITO(IAP), O/o
the CIT(Audit & ITAT), Bhubaneswar.
2. M. Srinivas Rao, aged about 58 years, S/o Late M.
Dharmananda Rao, Working as ITO, (Judl. & Tech.), O/o
the Pr.CCIT, Odisha Region, Bhubaneswar.
3. Ajay Kumar Nayak, aged about 59 years, S/o Late.
Harchand Nayak, working as ITO, AU-(1)(4)(3), BSNL
Building Bhubaneswar.
4. Balakrushna Sahu, aged about 57 years, S/o Late
Laxmidhar Sahoo, working as ITO Legal, O/o Pr.CCIT,
Odisha Region, Bhubaneswar.
5. Manoranjan Pattanaik, aged about 59 years, S/o
Narayan Pattanaik, working as ITO (PR&W), O/o
Pr.CCIT, Odisha Region, Bhubaneswar.
6. Tanusri Roy, aged about 58 years, D/o Late
Kalicharan Roy, Working as ITO (AU)-(1)(2)(4), O/o the
Pr.CCIT, Odisha Region, Bhubaneswar.
7. S. Venkat Rama, aged about 54 years, D/o Late
S.K.S.Dayal Rao, 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan,
Bhubaneswar.
8. Umakanta Jena, aged about 51 years, S/o Natabar
Jena, working as ITO (IAP), Cuttack.
9 Pranaya Kumar Das, aged about 49 years. S/o Prafula
Chandra Das, Working as IIT, O/o CIT(Audit & ITAT),
Aayakar Bhawan Annexe, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar.
RAVI KUMAR
2025.11.14 10:34:43
+05'30'
2 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022
10. Rupesh Kumar Das, aged about 50 years, S/o late
Subash Chandra Das, working as Inspector of Income
Tax, Office of the DCIT,VU-(1)[1](1), Cuttack, Shelter
Chhak, P.O. Tulasipur, Cuttack, Pin-753008.
11. Keshab Chandra Mantry, aged about 52 years, S/o
Bhubaneswar Mantry, working as Inspector of Income
Tax O/o the ITO(JAO), Cuttack.
12. Alok Ranjan Panda, Aged about 50 years, S/o Naba
Kishore Panda, working as IIT, O/o ITO (Legal), Pr.CCIT,
Bhubaneswar.
......Applicants
VERSUS
1. Union of India represented through its Secretary
Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi,
PIN-110001.
2. The Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes,
Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North
Block, New Delhi, PIN-110001.
3. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Odisha, Aayakar Bhawan, Rajaswa Vihar, Vani Vihar,
P.S.- Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar, Dist. Khurda, PIN-
751007.
......Respondents
For the applicant : Mr. S.K.Ojha, Counsel
For the respondents : Mr. B.R.Swain, Counsel
O R D E R
PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A):
Before adumbrating the case in hands, in extenso, it is necessary to state that in the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. N.R.Parmar & Ors., in CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 7514-7515 OF 2005 RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 3 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 dated NOVEMBER 27, 2012/ 2012 (13) SCC 340, dispute relating to fixation of inter se seniority between promotees and Direct Recruits was decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court by holding as under:
"33. Having interpreted the effect of the OMs dated 7.2.1986 and 3.7.1986 (in paragraphs 20 and 21 hereinabove), we are satisfied, that not only the requisition but also the advertisement for direct recruitment was issued by the SSC in the recruitment year in which direct recruit vacancies had arisen. The said factual position, as confirmed by the rival parties, is common in all matters being collectively disposed of. In all these cases the advertised vacancies were filled up in the original/first examination/selection conducted for the same. None of the direct recruit Income Tax Inspectors herein can be stated to be occupying carried forward vacancies, or vacancies which came to be filled up by a later examination/selection process. The facts only reveal, that the examination and the selection process of direct recruits could not be completed within the recruitment year itself. For this, the modification/amendment in the manner of determining the inter-se seniority between the direct recruits and promotees, carried out through the OM dated 7.2.1986, and the compilation of the instructions pertaining to seniority in the OM dated 3.7.1986, leave no room for any doubt, that the rotation of quotas principle, would be fully applicable to the direct recruits in the present controversy. The direct recruits herein will therefore have to be interspaced with promotees of the same recruitment year.
34. In view of the above, the Civil Appeals, the Transferred Case, as well as, the Transfer Case (filed by the direct recruits and the Union of India) are hereby RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 4 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 allowed. The claim of the promotees, that the direct recruit Income Tax Inspectors, in the instant case should be assigned seniority with reference to the date of their actual appointment in the Income Tax Department is declined."
2. In compliance of the direction in the case of N.R.Parmar & Ors (supra), the Government of India Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions Department of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi issued OM No. 20011/1/2012- Estt. (D), dated the 4th March, 2014 stating inter alia as under:
5. The matter has been examined in pursuance of Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment on 27.11.2012, in Civil Appeal No. 7514-7515/2005 in the case of N.R. Parmar vs. UOI & Ors in consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs and it has been decided, that the manner of determination of inter-se-seniority of direct recruits and promotes would be as under:
a) DOPT OM No. 20011/1/2006-Estt.(D) dated
3.3.2008 is treated as nonexistent/withdrawn ab initio;
b) The rotation of quota based on the available direct recruits and promotees appointed against the vacancies of a Recruitment Year, as provided in DOPT O.M. dated 7.2.1986/3.07.1986, would continue to operate for determination of inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees;
c) The available direct recruits and promotees, for assignment of inter se seniority, would refer to the direct recruits and promotees who are appointed against the vacancies of a Recruitment Year;
d) Recruitment Year would be the year of initiating the recruitment process against a vacancy year;
e) Initiation of recruitment process against a vacancy year would be the date of sending of requisition for RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 5 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 filling up of vacancies to the recruiting agency in the case of direct recruits; in the case of promotees the date on which a proposal, complete in all respects, is sent to UPSC/Chairman-DPC for convening of DPC to fill up the vacancies through promotion would be the relevant date.
f) The initiation of recruitment process for any of the modes viz. direct recruitment or promotion would be deemed to be the initiation of recruitment process for the other mode as well;
g) Carry forward of vacancies against direct recruitment or promotion quota would be determined from the appointments made against the first attempt for filling up of the vacancies for a Recruitment Year;
h) The above principles for determination of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees would be effective from 27.11.2012, the date of Supreme Court Judgment in Civil Appeal No. 7514-7515/2005 in the case of N.R. Parmar Vs. UO1 & Ors;
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.
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.
3. Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Dept. of Revenue (CBDT), New Delhi, addressed letter on 27.05.2019 for taking RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 6 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 necessary action in the light of the DoP&T OM dated 04.03.2014 and report compliance.
4. The law laid down in the N.R. Parmar case, relating to determination of inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees in a grade/post was reviewed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of K. MEGHACHANDRA SINGH & ORS. VERSUS NINGAM SIRO & ORS vide Civil Appeal No. 8833-8835 of 2019 arising out of Sl,P(C) Nos.19565-19567 of 2019/reported in 2020 (5) SCC 689] and the Hon'ble vide order dated November 19,2019 held as under:
"40. The Judgment in N. R. Parmar (Supra) relating to the Central Government employees cannot in our opinion, automatically apply to the Manipur State Police Officers, governed by the MPS Rules, 1965. 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 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).
RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 7 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 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."
5. The Government of India Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions Department of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi, vide OM No. 20011/2/2019-Estt(D) dated 13th August, 2021, modified the earlier OM to the extent 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:
(i) DoPT's O.M. No. 20011/l/2012-Estt.(D) dated 4.3.2014.
issued in pursuance of Order dated 27.11.2012 in N.R. Parmar case is treated as non-est/withdrawn w.e.f. 19.11.2019.
(ii) As the Order dated 19.11.2019 is prospective, cases of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees, already decided in terms of O.M. No. 2001 l/l/2012-Estt.(D) dated 4.3 .2014, shall not be disturbed. i.e. old cases are not to be reopened.
(iii) In case of direct recruits and promotees appointed/joined during the period between 27.11.2012 and 18.11.2019 and in which case inter se seniority could not be finalized by 18.11.2019, shall also be governed by the provisions of O.Ms. dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 read with OM dated 4.3.2014, unless where a different RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 8 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 formulation/manner of determination of seniority has been decided by any Tribunal or Court.
(iv) For cases where the recruitment process has been initiated by the administrative Department/Cadre Authority before 19.11.2019 and where some appointments have been made before 19.11.2019 and remaining on or after 19.11.2019, the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees, shall also be governed by the provisions of O.Ms. dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 read with OM dated 4.3.2014 to ensure equal treatment of such appointees.
(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 promotes shall be determined in the following manner-
(a) The rotation of quota based on the percentage of vacancies allocated to direct recruitment and promotion in the notified recruitment rules/service rules, shall continue to operate for determination of vacancies to be filled by the respective quotas in a recruitment year.
(b) Determination of inter-se seniority between direct recruits and promotees, who are appointed against the vacancies of respective quota. would, however, be reckoned with reference to the year in which they are appointed i.e. year in which they are borne in the cadre or formal appointment order is issued. In case. where the recruitment year is the same as the year of appointment. the appointees shall be given seniority of that year.
RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 9 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022
(c) Where in case of promotees or direct recruits.
the year of appointment is the next year or any year subsequent to the recruitment year. the seniority of such promotees and direct recruits would be determined with reference to the year of their actual joining/appointment to the post. since they were not able to join in the said recruitment year in which the vacancy arose. Thus, they would get seniority of the year in which they actually join i.e. year in which formal appointment order is issued or they are borne in the service/cadre and that they shall not get seniority of any earlier year (viz. year of Vacancy/panel or year in which recruitment process is initiated).
(d) In terms of OMs dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986, rotation between promotees and direct recruits for the purpose of determination of inter-se seniority, would be undertaken only to the extent of available direct recruits and promotees in a particular year. The term 'available direct recruits or promotees' appearing in these OMs dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986, for the purpose of rotation of quota in fixation of inter-se seniority, shall mean the actual number of direct recruits and promotees appointed during the year after declaration of results/selection and completion of pre-appointment formalities as prescribed.
(e) As per (d) above, if adequate number of direct recruits (or promotees) do not become available in a particular year. the rotation of quotas" for the purpose of determining interse seniority, would stop after the available direct recruits and promotes are assigned their slots on their appointment/joining in that year.
(f) If no direct recruit is available in a particular year.
available promotees would he bunched together RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 10 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 in accordance with their position in the panel approved for promotion. Similarly. if no promotee is available in that year. available direct recruits would be bunched together, as per their position obtained in the selection process.
(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.
(h) Instructions contained in OMs dated 7.2.1986 and 3.7.1986, stand modified to the extent indicated in above paragraphs.
8. These provisions shall come into effect from 19.11.2019 onwards."
6. Also, the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Dept. of Revenue (CBDT), New Delhi, issued letter on 26.10.2021 for implementation of the aforesaid guidelines and submission of compliance report.
7. In compliance of the DOP&T OM dated 13.08.2021 (supra) and letter of the CBDT dated 26.10.2021 (supra), the PCIT, Bhubaneswar circulated the seniority list of Inspector of Income Tax vide order No. 18/2022-23 dated 05.09.2022 stating therein that seniority list in respective cadres are subject to outcome of RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 11 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 the orders that may be passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jarnail Singh and others Vs Laxmi Narayan Gupta & Ors, Civil Appeal No. 629/20222 arising out of SLP(C)No. 30621/2011.
The applicants submitted representations individually and the respondents department, upon consideration of the same, intimated individually the reason of rejection of their representations, extract from one of such letter of rejections is reproduced below:
"3.1 While conducting the review DPC on 14.09.2015 cited above, certain other issues (hence referred as 'local issues) which are exclusive to the Odisha Charge were also dealt with by the Review DPCs as follows.
(1) Mistake in apportion of vacancies between DR & PR: The vacancies between PR and DR has to be rotated in ratio of 2:1 for a particular vacancy year. In the review DPCs on account of N.R. Parmar it was noticed that the apportion of year wise vacancies between DR & PR in the grades of IIT & UDC from 1986 & onwards, has not been strictly done as per above guidelines. Additionally, in R.Ys 1986-87, 87-88, 90-91.....97-98 and so on, promotions had been sometimes given against DR vacancies which had already been reported to SSC.
(ii) Promotion of ineligible persons: It was noticed that in some years few officials have been promoted despite not fulfilling the eligibility criteria.
(iii) Wrong fixation of Inter-se-seniority:
(a) It was named that in the IIT grade, the inter se seniority between ministerial and stenographer has to be followed in ratio of 3:1. This was not found to be correctly given in the R.Ys 1986-87, 87-88, 90-
91, 91-92 and so on.
RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 12 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022
(b) Fixation of seniority of persons recruited on compassionate appointment, inter charge transfer, inter departmental transfer and sports quota etc. had not been effected as per the extant CBDT instructions/Circulars.
(iv) Implementation of own merit' rule w.e.f. 02.07.1997: It was found that the own merit rule had been implemented in Odisha Charge from the year 2008-09 onwards. The own merit refers to Reservation in promotion. The DOPT OM No. 36012/45/2005/Estt(Res.), dated 10.08.2010, clarified that SC/ST candidate appointed by promotion on their own merit and seniority and not owing to reservation or relaxation of qualification will be adjusted against unreserved points of reservation roster. This should have been applied from 1997 itself.
3.2 In the review DPC conducted on 14.09.2015, each of the local issue was discussed in detail and a considered view was taken by the then DPC and the O/o Pr.CCIT at that point of time. The seniority list drawn was crculated vide this office order dated 14.09.2015 which contained the impact of local issues considered as above. Thereafter, the representations received against implementation of these local issues have been disposed off. Some of the aggrieved persons have approached Hon'ble CAT against implementation of these 'Local Issues' and some of these petitions are still pending before Hon'ble CAT. However, there was no stay granted nor any adverse observations made by Hon'ble CAT regarding implementation of these Local Issues."
4. Thereafter, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ms. Veena Kothawale Vs. UOI held that the N.R.Parmar judgment shall be implemented prospectively i.e. from 27.11.2012 (date of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement in N.R.Parmar) and not retrospectively. Subsequently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also vide its order dated 19.11.2019 in case of K.Meghachandra Singh & Ors Vs Nigam Siro & Ors held that the N.R.Parmar judgment shall be implemented prospectively i.e. 27.11.2012 and not retrospectively.
The DoP&T, being the nodal Department, examined the judgment of the Hon'ble SC dated 19.11.2019 in K.Megachandra Singh & Others Vs Nigam Siro & Ors case and circulated the guidelines for fixation of inter se-seniority RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 13 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 between direct recruits and promotees vide O.M. dated 13.08.2021. The DoP&T vide the aforementioned OM treated its guidelines, circulated vide OM No.20011/1/2012-Estt. (D) dated 04.03.2014 as non-existent/withdrawn with effect from 19.11.2019. Further, the OM dated 13.08.2021 also gives protection against re-opening of those old cases, which have been decided in terms of DoPT's OM dated 04.3.2014.
6. Based on the above, the DOPT has decided (OM dated 13.08.2021) to modify the instructions relating to determination of inter se seniority between promotees and direct recruits as under:
i) DoPT's OM No.20011/1/2012-Estt. (D) dated 04.03.2014, issued in pursuance of Hon'ble Supreme Court order dated 27.11.2012 in N.R.Parmar case is treated as non-est/withdrawn w.e.f. 19.11.2019.
ii) As the order dated 19.11.2019 is prospective, cases of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees, already decided in terms of O.M. No.20011/1/2012- Estt.(D) dated 04.03.2014, shall not be disturbed i.e. old cases are not to be reopened.
iii) In case of direct recruits and promotees appointed/joined during the period between 27.11.2012 and 18.11.2019 and in which case inter se seniority could not be finalized by 18.11.2019, shall also be governed by the provisions of O.Ms dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 read with OM dated 04.03.2014, unless where a different formulation/manner of determination of seniority has been decided by any Tribunal or Court.
iv) For cases where the recruitment process has been initiated by the administrative Department/Cadre Authority before 19.11.2019 and where some appointments have been made before 19.11.2019 and remaining on or after 19.11.2019 the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees shall also be governed by the provisions of O.Ms dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 read with OM dated 4.3.2014 to ensure equal treatment of such appointees.
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 RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 14 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 19.11.2019, but where all appointments, subsequent to the initiated 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 manner as per Para-7(v)(a) to (h) of the DoPT's OM dated 13.8.2021.
7. Subsequently, the CBDT vide letter in F.No.A- 35015/26/2018-Ad.VI dated 26.10.2021 has issued necessary instructions, while circulating the DoP&T's O.M. dated 13.08.2021 to all the Pr.CsCIT, and further directed to take steps for compliance of the above in fixing the seniority of direct recruits and promotees and their inter-se seniority in the respective grades, as mentioned therein in a time bound manner. The operative portion of the instruction is as under:
"4. DoPT vide OM dated 13.08.2021 has treated its guidelines circulated vide OM dated 04.03.2014 as non-est/ withdrawn w.e.f. 19.11.2019. The OM dated 13.08.2021 gives protection for re-opening of those old cases, which have been decided in terms of DOPT OM dated 04.03.2014. The DOPT OM dated 04.03.2014 stipulates implementation of N R Parmar judgment prospectively w.e.f. 27.11.2012. As the seniority of DR & promotee officers was never fixed/determined by the respective CCA/Region in terms of guidelines prescribed in DOPT OM dated 04.03.2014, All India Inter se seniority list (AlISL) of ITO's, 2017 (circulated in 2018) prepared on the basis of information provided by the regions after implementation of N R Parmar judgment retrospectively was withdrawn vide letter dated 27.05.2019. The decision taken by this Department to withdraw AllSL-2017 (Circulated in 2018) is endorsed by DOPT OM dated 13.08.2021.
5. For compliance of DoPT guidelines on fixation of seniority of direct recruits and promote and their inter se seniority in the respective grades, all the Pr.CCIT (CCA) are required to take following steps in a time bound manner:
(i) Seniority of direct recruits and promotes already decided in terms of DoP&T's OM dated 04.03.2014 RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 15 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 shall not be disturbed. [Para7(ii) of DOP&T's OM dated 13.08.2021]
(ii) Fixation of seniority of direct recruits and promotees in the respective grade/post between 27.11.2012 and 18.11.2019, where inter se seniority could not be finalized by 18.11.2019, is strictly to be fixed in accordance with the provisions of DoP&T's OM dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 read with OM dated 04.03.2014, unless where a different formulation/manner of determination of seniority has been decided by any Tribunal or Court of Law [Para 7(iii) of DOP&T's OM dated 13.08.2021]
(iii) Where the recruitment process has been initiated before 19.11.2019 and continued after 19.11.2019, the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotes shall be governed in accordance with the provisions of DOP&T's OM dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 read with OM dated 04.03.2014. [Para 7(iv) of DOP&T's OM dated 13.08.2021]
(iv) 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 the 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 promotes shall be determined as per Para 7(v) of DOPT's OM dated 13.08.2021."
8. Accordingly, the guidelines contained in CBDT's letter dated 26.10.2021 and DoP&T's O.M. dated 13.08.2021 are implemented in this charge as under:-
A. For the Period 1986 to 27.11.2012: The original seniority in various cadres that existed prior to
27.11.2012 based on the DOPT OMs dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986, which was otherwise revised based on the Board's advisories dated 29.09.2014, 07.11.2014 and 16.01.2015, was restored. This was in view of the directions given by CBDT vide letter dated 27.05.2019 with the concurrence of DOPT that "the regions are required to undo the actions taken by them in the light of advisories dated 29.09.2014, 07.11.2014 and 16.01.2015 issued by O/o DGIT(HRD) and restore RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 16 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 the seniority position of respective officers in the respective grade that was maintained before N.R. Parmar Order."
B. For the Period 27.11.2012 to 18.11.2019:
The inter-se seniority between direct recruits and promotes is to be determined based on the instructions issued vide DoP&T's O.M. dated 04.03.2014 which is based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 27.11.2012 in the case of N.R. Parmar. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgement dated 19.11.2019 in the case of K. Meghachandra Singh, that the seniority determined as per the decision in case of N.R. Parmar is protected. (Decision to be implemented prospectively from 27.11.2012 till 18.11.2019).
C. From the Period 19.11.2019 onwards: The inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotes in different grades may be made as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors. in Civil Appeal No. 8833-8835 of 2019 {arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 190565-19567 of 2019} and be governed by Para-7 of the DoP&T's OM dated 13.08.2021.
9. Hence, in order to implement the directions contained in the aforesaid DOPT OM and CBDT's letter dated 13.08.2021 and 26.10.2021 cited above, review DPC was constituted with the mandate that it will review only the Parmar effect on the lines suggested in the DOPT OM and CBDT letters cited above and not to reconsider the local issues which were part of the DPC dated 14.09.2015. Before arriving at the decision to keep aside the local issues discussed at para 3 above, a clarification was sought from CBDT vide this office letter dated 17.11.2021 as to whether the aforesaid local issues need to be reconsidered by the review DPC meetings to be conducted at present for giving effect to the CBDT instructions dated 26.10.2021. In this regard, the Under Secretary (AD-VI), CBDT, New Delhi vide his letter in F.No.A-35015/26/2018-Ad.VI dated 11 February, 2022 intimated the following:
"The Pr. CCIT, Odisha is requested to segregate the local issues from implementation of the CBDT's RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 17 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 instructions vide letters dated 27.05.2019 & 26.10.2021 reiterating the instructions of DoP&T's OM. dated 04.03.2014 and 13.08.2021, respectively, and implement the DoP&T's OM dated 13.08.2021 in a time bound manner."
10. In above background, review DPC meetings were conducted from 08.08.2022 to 22.08.2022. As a result, the revised seniority/promotion list in various cadres was circulated vide this office order No.18/2022-23 and 05.09.2022. On circulating the seniority list, representation have been received which has been duly considered. After consideration of each of the case the representations are disposed off issues wise as under:
11.1 Local issues which are not related to N.R Parmar also considered which unsettled the settled seniority:
11.1.1 It is represented that the local issues which are not at all linked to NR Parmar case have been considered in the review DPC which resulted in unsettling the settled positions in the seniority list stretching from RY 1986 onwards. This is not in conformity with the directions of the Board letter dated 26.10.2021 read with the Board's direction dated 27.05.2019.
The CBDT communication dated 11.02.2022 to Pr.CCIT,Odisha, advised in segregate local issues from implementation of CBDT instruction vide letter dated 27.05.2019 and 26.10.2021, whereas the same were considered in the DPC proceedings dated 05.09.2022 through which the seniority list is circulated. Unsettling the settled matters is against laid down judicial principles.
11.1.2 The local issues considered in the DPC conducted on 14.09.2015 are specific to the Odisha region and have no relation to the NR Parmar issue. However, the same were considered for the sake of convenience at the time of review DPC for giving effect to NR Parmar in the year 2015. Further, each of the local issues was considered on its own merit against the respective candidates, based on which the seniority was decided with the approval of the competent authority.
11.1.3 Thereafter, the representations received against implementation of these local issues have been disposed off.
RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 18 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 Some of the aggrieved persons have approached Hon'ble CAT against implementation of these Local Issues and some of these petitions are still pending before Hon'ble CAT. However, there was no stay granted nor any adverse observations are made by CAT regarding implementation of these Local Issues. Accordingly, the local issues which were already considered earlier with the approval of the competent authority have been duly segregated and are not touched upon at present which is in fact in conformity with the Board's communication dated 11.02.2022 and also not violating any of the Board's instruction dated 26.10.2021 read with directions dated 27.05.2019. Further, as the representations against the seniority affected by considering the local issues have already been dealt with, any such representation on this issue made at present is beyond the limitation period of four years and accordingly not maintainable. In view of above, the representation on this issue is rejected.
11.2 Violation of DoPT's OM dated 21.5.2019 & 13.8.2021 & CBDT letters dated 21.5.2019 & 26.10.2021 11.2.1 It is stated that the CBDT's letter dated 26.10.2021 and DoPT OM 13.8.2021 elaborates the modifications to instruction relating to inter se seniority between DR & PR which are:
(i) In the OMs & letters, nowhere it is found that review DPCs are required to be made from R.Y 1986-87. The only mandate in the OM dated 13. 8.2021 is that the order of SC in case of K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors is prospective i.e. from 19.11.2019. The CBDT in its letter has directed all Pr.CCIT (CCA) to undo the action taken by them in various grades in the light of advisories issued by the DGIT(HRD) and restore the original seniority maintained before N.R. Parmar judgment.
(ii) the judgment is prospective, cases of inter se seniority of DR and Promotees already decided in terms of OM 2001/1/2012 -Estt.(D) dated 4.3.2014, shall not be disturbed i.e. old cases are not to be reopened.
(iii) The all India inter se seniority list (AIISL) of ITOs ( as on 01.01.2012) circulated by the CBDT, vide letter dated 1.9.2015, which did not have any effect of N.R. Parmar RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 19 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 order of Hon'ble SC and DoPT's OM dated 3.3.2008 is valid and legal AllSL.
(iv) After issue of DoPT's OM dated 13.8.2021 and CBDT's letter dated 26.10.2021, no order of any judicial authority is passed to review the DPCs which were settled for more than 36 years. Thus, the review of settled seniority is against the decision of Hon'ble SC in the case of Sri Shib Shankar Mohapatra Vs. State of Orissa reported in (2010) 12 SCC 471.
Comments:
11.2.2. The DoPT vide its OM No.20011/1/2012-Estt.D dated 04.03.2014 has directed to recast seniority in wake of N.R. Parmar Judgment. The DIT(HRD) vide its advisories dated 29.09.2014, 07.11.2014 and 16.01.2015 directed to recast seniority from 1986. Subsequently, based on DoPT OM dated 13.08.2021, the CBDT while reiterating para-2 of letter dated 27.5.2019 clarified vide letter dated 26.10.2021 that the N.R. Parmar judgment be applied prospectively from 27.11.2012.
Further, it was directed to undo the actions taken in light of advisories dated 29.9.2014, 07.11.2014 and 16.01.2015, issued by the O/o the DGIT(HRD) and restore the seniority position of the respective officers in the respective grade that was maintained before N.R. Parmar order.
11.2.3 Accordingly, the exercise was initiated in this charge and review DPC conducted on above lines and the seniority was restored/protected/refixed for the respective periods as discussed above. Hence, there is no anomaly in DPC proceedings on this issue and accordingly the representation made on this ground needs to be rejected.
11.3 Inter-se-seniority between Ministerial and Stenographer grade not followed 11.3.1 Some officials in their representation pointed out that the DoPT OM dated 10.9.1985 & 12.12.1988 lays down the principles for fixation of inter-se-seniority among the promotees, where promotions to a grade are made from more than one feeder grades. However, on the basis of clarificatory letter of Board dated 6.4.2009, undue importance is being given to a particular group i.e. the Ministerial Cadre, over another group i.e. Stenographer Cadre, placing each of them RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 20 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 below three persons promoted from Ministerial Cadre, ignoring their scales of pay in the feeder grate, date of joining in the said feeder grade/date of joining in their feeder grade. Further, the clarificatory letter of Board dt. 06.04.2009 regarding fixation of inter se seniority in the grade of ITI has been given retrospective effect right from R.Y 1986-87.
11.3.2 Comments: The stenographers group and Ministerial staff group both are considered for promotion the grade of ITI on the basis of a quota of vacancies in the ratio of 1:3 as per Recruitment Rules and Board's Instructions. The inter-se seniority between ministerial staff and stenographers had been resolved in 2009 on the basis of CBDT's clarification. It clarified that the provisions in RR that persons working in the higher grade will rank senior to person working in the lower grade, operates within the respective Ministerial cadre or stenographer cadre and not amongst the two grades. Accordingly, the inter-se seniority has been fixed in this DPC as done by original DPC's in 2015. Further, the matter is not related to Supreme Court decision in the case of N R Parmar. Therefore, the representations made on this ground needs to be rejected.
12. Seniority specifically has not been downgraded in the case of officers/officials mentioned herein. Any change of seniority as reflected in order no. 18/2022-23 dated 05.09.2022 vis-à-vis seniority list circulated in 2013 & 2015 is due to review DPC carried on in accordance with DoPT's OM dated 21.5.2019 & 13.8.2021 & CBDT letters dated 21.5.2019 26.10.2021. Accordingly, all representations are disposed off."
8. BEING aggrieved, the twelve applicants, who are working as IIT and ITO in Odisha Region under Pr.CCIT, Bhubaneswar have filed this OA praying as under:
"(1) To quash the reply/orders issued to the Applicants under the Annexure-A/15 Series rejecting their representations;
(ii) To quash the office order No. 18/2022-23 dtd.05.09.2022 (Annex.A/13) hold the same is illegal arbitrary and contrary to law;
RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 21 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022
(iii) To hold that the reviewing of seniority since 1986-87 is contrary to the policy/circulars issued by the DoP&T so also CBDT from time to time with regard to fixation of seniority;
(iv) To hold that the present actions of the Respondent No.3 revising the seniority in all grades since 1986-87 and the consequential actions thereof are illegal and without jurisdiction.
(v) To hold that the undertaking review since 1986-87 amounts the review the settled seniority and contrary to the judicial pronouncements made from time to time;
(vi) To direct the Respondent No.3 to restore the seniority position of the applicants as was fixed by 08.12.2010 (Annex.A/11) i.e. prior to 27.11.2012; (vil) To extend all the consequential benefits to the applicants as they are entitled to on restoration of their seniority;
(viii) And pass any other order/orders as deem & fit in the interest of justice and the applicants are entitled to."
9. Respondents filed their counter opposing the stand of the applicants, the sum and substance of the facts and grounds stated in support of their stand are as under;
10. In compliance of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.R.Parmar (supra), the CBDT issued instruction vide letters dated 06.06.2014, 29.09.2014, 07.11.2014 and 16.01.2015 to all Cadre Controlling Authorities to recast the seniority in a time bound manner from 1986 onwards where the element of Direct Recruitment existed. Accordingly, on the RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 22 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 recommendation of the review DPC, the seniority list was recast and circulated in the grade of IIT vide orders dated 01.09.2015, 14.09.2015 and 01.04.2017 and promotions were effected.
11. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ms. Veena Kothawale Vs. UOI held that the N.R. Parmar judgment shall be implemented prospectively i.e. w.e.f. 27.11.2012 and not retrospectively. Subsequently, Hon'ble Apex Court in case of K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. (supra) vide order dated 19.11.2019 held that the decision in N.R. Parmar (supra) shall be implemented prospectively from 27.11.2012 and not retrospectively.
12. Based on the aforesaid decision, in supersession of the earlier instruction issued on 04.03.2014, the DoP&T, New Delhi, issued OM dated 13.08.2021 relating to fixation of inter-se-
seniority between direct recruits and promotees. Accordingly, the CBDT, New Delhi, addressed letter F.No.A-35015/26/2018- Ad.V1 dated 26.10.2021, which was duly implemented by holding review DPCs in different grades and order dated 05.09.2022 was issued. While implementing the CBDT's letters RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 23 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 dated 27.05.2019 and 26.10.2021, review DPCs were held in all grades w.e.f. RY 1986-87 onwards. At the time of holding review DPCs in 2022, the issues already rectified and settled at the time of review DPCs in 2015 kept unchanged. In para 26 of the counter, it is stated that pursuant to the N.R.Parmar judgment, the CBDT issued letters dated 06.06.2014 and subsequent advisories dated 29.09.2014, 07.11.2014 and 16.01.2015 and review DPCs from RY 1986-87 to 2014-15 in the year 2015 was held to recast the seniority from 1986 onwards in all cadres where the element of Direct Recruit existed. Thereafter, CBDT vide letter dated 26.10.2021 issued instructins while circulating DoP&T OM dated 13.08.2021 to all PR. CCITs to take steps for compliance of the aboe and fix seniority of DR and promotees and their inter se seniority in respective grades. Subsequently, again review DPC was held in August 2022 where it was decided not to roll back such corrections. Further, in para 29 of the counter, it has been reiterated that seniority position in respect of the applicants published in the year 2015 and 2017 are continued to be same in the seniority list dated 05.09.2022. The RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 24 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 seniority position as settled in 2015 from 1986-87 and onwards in promotion (after correction of some past infractions which were apparent from record and not owing to change in the rule position/applicable principle) remain unchanged. Accordingly, it is the stand of the respondents that this OA being devoid of any merit is liable to be dismissed.
13. Ld. Counsel for the parties led emphasis on the points stated in their respective pleadings and after giving due consideration, we have perused the stand taken in the OA, counter and rejoinder. We have also perused the documents placed in support of the pleadings and the decisions referred to above.
14. In the counter, so also in course of hearing, the consistent stand of the respondents is that there was no change in the seniority list published thorough circular dated 05.09.2022, which is impugned in this OA to that of the seniority list earlier published in 2015 and 2017. But, confusion arose when respondents rejected the representations of the applicants by stating many things other than admitting what has been stated in RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 25 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 the counter that there was no variation in year of allotment and assignment of seniority position fixed and published in 2015 and 2017. The applicants sought to quash the circular dated 05.09.2022 through which seniority list was published but without making any one, who shall be affected upon quashing the same, as party respondents. It is no more res integra that a necessary party is a person who ought to have joined as a party and in whose absence no effective decree could be passed at all by the court. If a necessary party is not impleaded, the suit itself is liable to be dismissed. A proper party is a party who, though not a necessary party, is a person whose presence would enable the court to completely, effectively and adequately adjudicate upon all matters in dispute in the suit, though he need not be a person in favour of or against whom the decree is to be made. In the case of Vijay Kumar Kaul v. Union of India (2012) 7 SCC 610 , (2012) 2 SCC (L&S) 491, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that in the matter of dispute relating to seniority, persons whose interest shall be affected by granting the relief being necessary parties must be arraigned as party and when they have not been RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 26 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 impleaded as parties, such a relief is difficult to grant. Further, in the case of Indu Shekhar Singh v. State of U.P (2006) 8 SCC 129 , 2006 SCC (L&S) 1916, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the Court should not determine the question of inter se seniority in absence of parties whose interest is likely to be jeopardized upon grant of the relief relating to inter se seniority.
15. At the same time, it is established from the record that in compliance of the CBDT letter dated 04.03.2014, 06.06.2014, 29.09.2014 and 07.11.2014, which were issued for complying with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.R.Parmar (supra), review DPCs were convened and revised seniority lists were issued by the PCCIT, Bhubaneswar vide order dated 01.09.2015 and 14.09.2015 showing the respective years of allotment to the posts and assigning respective seniority position of the Inspectors of Income Tax. According to the applicants, in implementation of the CBDT circular issued after the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.Meghachandra (supra), the respondents reversed their seniority position earlier fixed as per the decision of the Hon'ble RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 27 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022 Apex Court in the case of N.R.Parmar (supra), vide circular dated 05.09.2022, which is against the dicta laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.Meghachandra (supra) by holding that "this decision will not affect the inter-se seniority already based on N.R. Parmar and the same is protected". The authorities concerned are under obligation and are duty-bound not to act contrary to the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court/competent court of law. Thus, it is conclusively established that the respondents recast the seniority list earlier in pursuance of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.R.Parmar (supra) and, therefore, the place and position assigned therein cannot be altered/revised/modified in view of the direction of the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of K.Meghachandra (supra). This was also the view taken by the co-ordinate Bench of Jabalpur in the case of Prashant Kumar Pandey & Ors. Vs UOI & Ors vide Original Application Nos.200/184/2022, 200/246/2022 and 200/829/2024 disposed of vide common order dated 27.06.2025.
RAVI KUMAR 2025.11.14 10:34:43 +05'30' 28 O.A.No. 260/00653 of 2022
16. In the circumstances stated above and keeping in mind the specific direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.Meghachandra (supra), the respondents are hereby directed to issue the revised seniority list showing applicants' respective years, place, position as was shown on the recommendation of review DPC held in compliance of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.R.Parmar (supra); notwithstanding the orders of rejection of their representations under A/15 series and the circular dated 05.09.2022 within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
17. In the result, the OA stands allowed by leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
(Pramod Kumar Das) (Sudhi Ranjan Mishra)
Member (Admn.) Member (Judl.)
RK/PS
RAVI KUMAR
2025.11.14 10:34:43
+05'30'