Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
S Nagaraj vs Deptt Of Posts on 26 September, 2025
1
O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00008/2023
Order Reserved on: 4.9.2025
Date of Order: 26.09.2025
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.K SHRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
1. Sri Nagaraj S,
S/o D.S.Srinivasa Rao, Aged 52 Years,
Working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts,
O/o General Manager, CEPT,
Postal Training Centre Campus, Nazarbad,
Mysuru-570010, Residing at No LIG 174, II Stage,
KHB, Kuvempunagar, Mysuru-570023.
2. Poornima Pradeep, W/o Sri.Pradeep,
Aged 49 Years, Working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts (CBS
CPC), Payments Channel Division,
GPO Building, Bengaluru-560001,
Residing at Prestige Falcon City,
Konanakunte Cross, Bengaluru-560062.
3. D. Ganesha,
S/o Late T.Durgappa, Aged 49 Years,
working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts [R],
O/o Superintendent of Post Offices, Shivamogga-577202, Residing
at No 56, "Sri Durga", Opp Arunodaya School,
Shivamogga-577 204.
4. C.C.Cheluvaraya,
S/o C.B.Chandrashekar,
SHAIN SHAINEY
CAT
VIJU
EY Bangalore
2025.09.26
12:20:28
VIJU +05'30'
2
O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
Aged 53 Years, working as ASP[Mails],
O/o Postmaster General, Bengaluru HQ Region,
Palace Road, Bengaluru-560 001,
Residing at 548/1, 7th Main,
Vijayanagar, Bengaluru 560040
5. B.R.Madhusudan, S/o Late B.Rama Rao,
Aged years, working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts,
O/o Superintendent of Post Offices,
Bengaluru East Division, Bengaluru 560025,
residing at No. 101, First Floor, Red Tree Rain Drops,
Narayana Nagar, 3rd Block, Doddakallasandra,
Bengaluru-560062.
6. AT Srikantaiah,
S/o Late A. Thimmappaiah, Aged 55 Years,
working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts (HQ),
O/o Superintendent of Post Offices, Hassan Division,
Hassan-573201, Residing at "Ananya" Postal Colony,
Near HP gas Godown,
Channapatna Extension, Hassan -573201.
7. K Sudhakara,
S/o S.Krishnamachar, Aged 53 Years,
working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts (Legal Cell),
O/o Chief Postmaster General, Karnataka Circle,
Bengaluru-560001, Residing at # 107,
Golden Land mark Apartments, Chandana Layout,
Bengaluru-560091.
8. S.Nagendra,
S/o Subbanna S., Aged 45 years,
working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts,
CEPT Campus, Nazarbad, Mysuru-570010,
Residing at No 17, Union Bank Road,
JSS Layout II Stage, Sardar Vallabhabhai Patel Nagar,
T Narsipura Road, Mysuru-570028.
9. P.Chidananda,
S/o Late Gurulingappa,
SHAIN SHAINEY
CAT
VIJU
EY Bangalore
2025.09.26
12:20:28
VIJU +05'30'
3
O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
Aged 47 years, working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts
(Division),
O/o Superintendent of Post Offices,
Gadag Division, Gadag-582 101,
Residing at H.No.07/21,
Sri Gadilingeshwara Krupa,
Opp Sri Ramachandra Yogashrama,
Nehru Colony Extension, Bellari-583103.
10. Tarakesh T. B.,
S/o Late T.C.Basavaraju,
Aged 43 Years, working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts,
O/o Postmaster General, Bengaluru HQ Region,
Palace Road, Bengaluru-560001, Residing at Flat No 105,
SLV Nakshatra,
Chinnaswamappa Street,
Horamavu, Bengaluru-560113.
11.Chethan Uthappa T. K.,
S/o Late T.A.Kuttappa,
Aged 46 Years, working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts,
O/o Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Mysuru Division, Mysuru-570020,
Residing at #202, Astrum Grand View,
Opp APMC Yard, Nanjangud Road,
Mysuru-570025.
12.Raju K
S/o Late R.Kaleswar,
Aged 53 Years, working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts [Hq],
O/o Superintendent of Post Offices,
Nanjangud Division,
Nanjangud-571310,
Residing at #40, 11th Main,
D Block, I Stage, J.P. Nagar,
Mysuru-570 031.
13.Mallikarjuna Swamy N, S/o N.Nagaraja,
Aged 47 years, working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts,
Benagluru South Sub Diviion-1,
Bengaluru-560018, Residing at 1160/22, 5th Cross,
SHAIN SHAINEY
CAT
VIJU
EY Bangalore
2025.09.26
12:20:28
VIJU +05'30'
4
O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
12th Main, Raghavendra Block, Srinagar,
Bengaluru-560050.
14. Rekha K.,
W/o D.Dharmapala, Aged 47 Years,
working as Assistant Superintendent of Posts (Hq),
O/o Superintendent of Post Offices, Chikkamagalur-577 101,
Residing at Kalyan Nagar, 1st Phase,
60 Feet Road, Chikkamagaluru-577 102 ...Applicants
(By Advocate Shri.A.R.Holla)
Vs.
1. Union of India, Secretary, Ministry of Communications,
Department of Posts, Dak Bhavan, New Delhi-110001.
2. Chief Post Master General, Karnataka Circle,
Bengaluru-560001. ......Respondents
(By Advocates Shri.S Prakash Shetty for R 1 & 2)
ORDER
PER: DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
This Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 claiming the following reliefs:
"i. To quash the seniority lists appended to the (i) Order No.130975/2020/SPN-II-DoP dated 24.07.2020, Annexure A6, (ii) Order No.STA/1-21/AIGL/IP/III dated at Bengaluru-560001 the 06.05.2022, Annexure A7 (iii) Order No.X-07/11/2019-SPN-II dated 20.06.2022, Annexure A8, (iv) Order No.X- 07/14/2019-SPN-II dated 22.11.2019, Annexure-A9 and (v) Order No.X-
SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 5 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE 07/21/2019-SPN-11 dated 23.01.2020, Annexure A10 and the Order No.9-10/2022- SPG-II dated 04.10.2022, issued by the respondent No.1, Annexure-A21 ii. Direct the Respondent No.1 to revise the All India Seniority Lists strictly as per the (i) O.M. No.35014/2/86-Estt (D) dated 07.02.1986, Annexure-3, (ii) O.M. No.22011/7/86-Estt(D) dated 03.07.1986, Annexure-A4 and (iii) O.M. No.20011/1/2006-Estt.(D) dated 03.03.2008, Annexure-A5 and iii. Grant such other relief deemed fit in the circumstances of the case."
2. The reliefs are claimed on the grounds as mentioned in paragraphs 5(1) to (10) of the Original Application. The brief facts narrated by the applicants are that the applicants were appointed as Postal Assistants/Sorting Assistants in various Divisions in Karnataka Circle. After completing 5 years of service, they appeared in the departmental examination and, on being successful, they were appointed as Inspector of Posts against the vacancy years 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. The Chief Postmaster General fixed the seniority of the applicants by placing them in the actual year of their appointment and not as per the year of vacancy. Further, promotion to the next higher cadre of Assistant Superintendent of Posts was granted to the applicants based on the said seniority lists. In view of Rule 32-E (a) SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 6 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
(i) of Posts and Telegraphs Manual Volume IV, the seniority was fixed based on the order of merit of the competitive examination. Where recruitment is made partly from departmental candidates and partly from outsiders, the former would always rank senior to the latter. The seniority was fixed by placing the direct recruits from the date of their entry into service.
3. The seniority list in the cadre has to be finalized on an all-India basis. The said seniority list is the criteria for placement into the Postal Services Group B cadre. As per the O.M. No.35014/2/86-Estt.(D) dated 07.02.1986, O.M. No. 22011/7/86 (D) dated 03.07.1986 and O.M. No. 20011/1/2006-Estt. (D) dated 03.03.2008 of the DoP&T it was envisaged that inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees is to be fixed on the basis of the rotation of quota of vacancies as per the actual year of appointment after declaration of results/selection and completion of pre-appointment formalities. However, subsequently, the direct recruit Inspectors appointed during the years 2007, 2008 and 2009 were included in the list of 2004, adversely affecting the promotional opportunities of the applicants. The officers who have been assigned seniority in the cadre, as per the Office Memorandum issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 7 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE are aggrieved by assigning seniority to those Inspectors who were appointed subsequently above the applicants.
4. The applicants submits that they have filed this O.A. against the seniority assigned to the direct recruit Inspector Posts who joined the cadre after the applicants flouting the guidelines issued by the respondent No.l and thereby depriving the legitimate promotion through seniority as per the Recruitment Rules and contrary to the settled position of law declared by the Supreme Court.
5. On notice, a reply statement has been filed by the respondents. Thereafter, a rejoinder has also been filed by the applicants. Two memos have been filed by the applicants for producing some documents and are also taken on record. Respondents have also filed Memos with additional submission and document.
6. On 24.10.2024, 27.11.2024, 6.12.2024, 3.1.2025, 6.2.2025, 12.3.2025, part of the arguments were heard and finally heard on 2.4.2025. But while examining the record, it was considered essential to list the case again for being spoken to on certain points and the case came up for hearing on 6.6.2025, 27.6.2025 and 11.7.2025. When it was finally heard on 11.07.2025, Shri A.R. Holla for the applicants SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 8 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE and Shri. S. Prakash Shetty, for the respondents, were present and heard. As it required further hearing on certain points, the case was taken up for being spoken to. When the case came up for final hearing on 4.9.2025 Shri.A.R.Holla for the applicants and Shri.S.Prakash Shetty for the respondents were present and heard.
7. The applicants further filed their written submission and records on 18.6.2025 and the respondents also filed their written submission along with certain records on 26.6.2025.
8. In the written submission of the applicants, they further emphasized that the grievance of the applicants pertains to non- following the principles of 1986 O.M, which were in force when they joined the cadre through LDCE in the year 2004-2007. They further assert that the respondents issued the Letter dated 12.07.2022 making Asst. Supdt. Posts cadre as All India Cadre although without amending the statutory Recruitment Rules issued vide Gazette Notification dated 01.02.2013. They further say that even before 01.02.2013, Asst. Supdt. Posts were Circle cadre. The copy of the Gazette Notification was produced as Annexure- A 24. The applicants further asserts that no amendments to the said RR were undertaken by Respondent No 1, till date and that, as per the existing statutory rules, SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 9 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE ASP is still a Circle cadre. They further say that in this regard, Respondent No. 1 issued directions to all circles vide Letter No.X- 06/2/2022-SPN-II-DOP dated 24.04.2025, wherein it has been reiterated that the competent Appointing Authority for Inspector Posts and Asst. Supdt. of Posts is the Circle itself. The copy of the letter is produced as Annexure- A 25. They further said that besides, Respondent No. 2 prepared the Circle level seniority List vide Annexure-A 2 as per the then-existing statutory RR of Asst. Supdt. of Posts and instructions issued by Respondent No 1 vide Letter No 137- 6/2001-SPB-II dated 22.04.2003 which is produced as Annexure- A 26 wherein it has been clearly instructed at Para 2 as below.
"The basic cadre is Inspector of Posts, from which feeder cadre, selection to PS Gr 'B' is made. The combined gradation list of Inspector of Posts prepared on the basis of merit position in Departmental examination is relevant seniority list for considering circle level promotion to the merged cadre of Asst. Superintendent of Posts, which is a circle cadre."
9. The applicants further say that, accordingly, Respondent No. 2 prepared Annexure A 2 in the year 2010 as per the principles stipulated by DoPT in Annexure- A3, A4 & A 5 and also granted the promotion to the cadre of Asst. Supdt. Posts to the applicants between 2012 and 2015. Thus, the inter-se seniority between the applicants SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 10 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE who are promotees (2004, 2005, 2006, 2007) and the direct recruits (2007, 2008, 2009) who joined/appointed during 2004-2008 is seized and settled as per the principles outlined in the DoPT OMs earlier referred to.
10. The applicants assert that respondent No 1 is duty-bound to follow the principles of the said OMs without any deviation in preparing the All India Seniority Lists also. But to the contrary, Respondent No 1 prepared the All India Seniority Lists Annexure A6 to A 10 by following the principles laid down in OM dated 04.03.2014 (Annexure-A11) even though the OM specifically stipulates in Para 5 h & i that the seniority already settled should not be reopened, and the revised principles are applicable w.e.f 27.11.2012 i.e, from the date of issue of judgement by Hon'ble Supreme Court.
11. The applicants assert that in view of the above contentions, the grounds relied upon by the Respondents are fallacious and misleading one as the decision of the Respondent No 1 in issuing the letter dated 12.07.2022 making Asst. Supdt. of Posts as All India cadre with immediate effect i.e, from 12.07.2022 has no material effect on the prayer of the Applicants in fixing the All India Seniority as per the SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 11 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE then prevailing DoPT OMS dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 & 3.3.2008(Annexures 3, 4 & 5) and not as per OM dated. 04.03.2014.
12. The applicants further assert that up to the issue of Letter dated 12.07.2022 by the Respondent No 1, Asst. Supdt of Posts was circle cadre and this was the first decision taken to make centralized All India Cadre even though the Recruitment Rules of Asst. Supdt. Posts issued in 01.02.2013 stipulates as circle cadre and the said RR is still in force as no further amendments were carried out.
13. The applicants further asserts that the stand of the Supreme Court on the supremacy of Recruitment Rules issued under the authority of Article 309 of the Constitution of India was reiterated by DOPT in OM No. AB.14017/79/2006-Estt. (RR) dated 06.09.2007 in paras 2, 3 and 4 of the said O.M. The copy of the said OM produced as Annexure-A 27. Hence, the administrative instructions issued vide letter 12.07.2022 do not withstand the scrutiny of law.
14. The applicants further assert that though Annexure A 19 is the Draft Seniority list for the year 2006 issued on 22.11.2019, the final provisional seniority list was issued on 18.01.2023 only. The copy of the said OM produced as Annexure-A 28. In this context, it is SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 12 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE pertinent that all India Seniority Lists are prepared based on the date of joining/appointment in the base cadre i.e, Inspector Posts, and the date of promotion to Asst. Supdt. of Posts cadre has no relevance as per the Annexure-3 cited above issued by the Respondent No 1. Thus, the purpose of the Circle Seniority List is to grant promotion to Asst. Supdt. Posts cadre, which is circle cadre up to 11.07.2022, and the purpose of maintaining the All India Seniority List is to grant promotion to the PS Gr B cadre from Inspector Posts cadre.
15. The applicants further say that the issue under dispute in this case is reckoning the principles laid down under OMs issued by DOPT which were in force when applicants (and others) joined the cadre from 2004 to 2009 and get the promotion to the next higher post of Asst. Supdt. of Posts from 2012 to 2015 as per the then prevailing principles of DOPT OMs dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 & 03.03.2008 instead of the principles subsequently Issued by the DoPT in the year 2014. While preparation of the All India Seniority Lists by Respondent No 1 from 2019 onwards, i.e, after unreasonable delay of more than 12 years, that too without taking into cognizance of the fact that the concerned circles have adopted the principles of DoPT OMs dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 & 03.03.2008 while preparing circle SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 13 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE seniority lists and already granted promotion to the ASP Cadre accordingly.
16. They further say that it is pertinent that even the principles laid down in DoPT OM dated 04.03.2014 are not in existence w.e.f. 18.11.2019 pursuant to the overruling of the N. R Parmar's case by the Hon'ble Apex Court. But contrary to the legal dictums, Respondent No 1 has issued the final provisional Lists for the year 2004 on 20.04.2022 (Annexure-A7 of OA) and for the year 2005 on 20.06.2022 (Annexure-A8 of OA) by following the principles of OM dated 04.03.2014 through it was non-existent as on that date.
17. The applicants therefore argue that it is just and legal, in the eyes of the law, to prepare the All-India Seniority lists based on the DoPT OMs dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 & 03.03.2008 as followed by the Circle in consonance with the prevailing OMs instead of OM dated 04.03.2014 which was not in force in 2022 as applicants ( and others ) were not appointed / joined the cadre on or after 27.11.2012 i.e, on the crucial date of Judgements of Hon'ble Apex Court as they were appointed in the years between 2004 - 2009. If the criteria for following the principles are that the prevailing instructions at the time of preparing the Seniority list instead of joining the cadre SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 14 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE as per the Respondents' version at para 4.11 and 5.4 of their Reply Statement, they should have followed the OM dated 13.08.2021, which is effective from 18.11.2019 and not OM dated 04.03.2014 while finalizing the seniority lists issued vide Annexure-A7, A8, A9 & A 10. Thus, the stand taken by the Respondents itself is contradictory and illegal as it is against the principles laid down by the nodal department from time to time in pursuance to the judgements of Hon'ble Apex Court.
18. The applicants further assert that making Asst. Supdt. of Posts cadre as All India cadre w.e.f. 12.07.2022 has no direct impact on the prayer of the Applicants as they have already got promotion at Circle level between 2012 and 2015 based on the circle seniority lists prepared by the Respondent No 2 in consonance with the OMs issued by DoPT dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 & 03.03.2008. Therefore, the Respondent No. 1 is also duty-bound to follow the principles enunciated in the said OMs applicable up to 26.11.2012 and the principles of the O. M dated 04.03.2014 (Annexure-A11 of OA) are specifically applicable to the promotees and Direct recruit Inspector of Posts who appointed/joined on or after 27.11.2012. In this regard, the nodal Ministry while issuing the OM dated 13.08.2021 SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 15 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE (Annexure- A 12 of OA) in the backdrop of the overruling of N.R.Parmar's judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 19.11.2019 in Civil Appeal No 8833-8835/2019, had withdrawn the previous OM dated 04.03.2014 Annexure-A 11 and clarified at Para 7(iii) as follows.
" 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."
19. Thus, the applicants assert that the nodal department itself emphasized that the principles laid down in OM dated 04.03.2014 are specifically applicable for the period from 27.11.2012 to 18.11.2019 and cannot be stretched back, thereby overriding the principles of previous OMs dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 & 03.03.2008. The applicants submitted that, but the Respondent No 1 prepared the All India Seniority lists vide Annexure A 6 to A 10, negating the principles of OM dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 and 03.03.2008 by making the Direct recruits as seniors by virtue of the year of vacancy and making the applicants as juniors despite the fact they were already SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 16 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE working and borne in the Inspector Posts joined the cadre on appointment. Further, it is also undisputed that the applicants are senior to the Direct Recruited Inspector Posts in the Asst. Supdt. cadre at circle level.
20. The applicants further say that the Nodal Department i.e, the DoPT has given clarification at Para 4 (i) to the Dept. of Revenue vide Diary No. 1354441/19/CR as below in response to the latter seeking clarification on giving retrospective effect of OM dated 04.03.2014:
" The concept of Recruitment Year has been introduced in OM dated 04.03.2014 in pursuance of Apex Court judgement dated 27.11.2012 and in consultation with Department of Legal Affairs, hence this principle is applicable w.e.f. 27.11.2012. If this principle of Recruitment Year was given effect from retrospective date i.e, 01.03.1986(date of applicability of OM dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986), it would have over riding effect on OM dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 and will unsettle the cadre dynamics. Hence the provisions contained in para 5© to para 5 (g) of OM dated 04.03.2014 is applicable w.e.f 27.11.2012 i.e the date of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in NR Parmar case. Para 5(i) of OM dated 04.03.2014 provides that the cases of seniority already settled with reference to the applicable interpretation of the term availability, as contained in DoPT OM dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 may not be reopened. Hence, this provision will not be applicable in the case of Para 5(a) of OM dated 04.03.2014."
SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 17 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
21. The applicants assert that Respondent No 1 deliberately violated the prevailing legal position issued vide DOPT OMs by giving retrospective effect to the OM dated 04.03.2014 by overriding the principles of OM dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 & 03.03.2008 and trying to unsettle the cadre dynamics jeopardizing the promotional progression of the Applicants.
22. Further, the applicants contend that different authorities in the administrative ministry prepare different seniority lists at different points of time, but the principles to be adopted for preparing the seniority list, whether it is circle/state level or All India Level, the principles already adopted by one of the authorities which was prevailing and in force when the persons joined the cadre on appointment, is very crucial for determining the inter-se seniority at all levels. Thus, if two different authorities follow different principles for the same set of persons joined/appointed in a particular period, it will affect the cadre dynamics as opined by the Nodal Dept. i.e, the DoPT in the above comments provided to Dept. of Revenue, as happened in the present case.
23. They further re-emphasised the relevance of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ms Veena Kothawale SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 18 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE v. Govt. of India & Others ((2018)SCC online Delhi 6710) while adjudicating on the matter of retrospective applicability of DOPT OM dated 04.03.2014 and which on challenging, the Hon'ble Apex Court dismissed the appeal and, in view of the above legal/rulings position, the Tribunal is requested to decide the case on merits without further adjournment as Respondent No 1 issued order dated 05.07.2025 (Produced as Annexure- A 30) calling for dossiers for the persons in the zone of consideration for promotion to the PS Gr B cadre, by relying on the challenged Seniority lists. It is to submit that many junior direct recruits have been promoted subject to the outcome of a pending case and if a further order of promotion is issued, the rights of the applicants to be considered for promotion as per their due seniority to be assigned as per DoPT OMs 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 & 03.03.2008, will be infringed.
24. The respondents have also filed their written submissions on 26.6.2025 wherein they submit that the cadre of Inspector Posts (IP) and Assistant Superintendent of Posts (ASP) were brought under centralized cadre management at the Directorate level with effect from 12.07.2022, vide Directorate's letter No X-7/15/2021-SPN-II dated 12.07.2022. Prior to this, cadre management was handled at the Circle level, with separate seniority lists maintained by each SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 19 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE Circle. Prior to the introduction of direct recruitment in the IP cadre, Circle-wise merit lists were prepared for Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) candidates. Subsequent to the amendment of Recruitment Rules in 2001 introducing the direct recruitment element, the process evolved as follows:
LDCE: Merit lists continued to be drawn separately for each Postal Circle.
Direct Recruitment (DR):Candidates were borne on an all-India merit lists prepared by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) and allocated to various Circles.
Accordingly, two separate seniority lists were maintained.
(ⅰ) A Circle-Level Seniority List, prepared by interspacing LDCE and DR Candidates in a 2:1 ratio, used for promotion to the ASP cadre within the Circle.
(ii) An All-India Seniority List, prepared by merging LDCE merit lists of all Circles for a given year and interspacing them with DR candidates in the 2:1 ratio, used for promotion to PS Group 'B'.
25. The respondents further assert that this bifurcated arrangement was a functional mechanism consistent with recruitment rules and administrative needs at the relevant time. They further assert that since the issuance of the aforementioned letter dated 12.07.2022, cadre management of both IP and ASP Cadres has been centralized at the SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 20 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE Directorate level. This includes handling of reservation rosters, conduct of DPC's for promotion to ASP, and other related activities. Approval of the competent authority has already been obtained for a change in the appointing authority. Necessary amendments to the Recruitment Rules are currently under process to reflect this structural change.
26. The respondents further submit that centralization of cadre management is a prospective administrative measure, intended to ensure uniformity in promotional timelines across Circles. All applicants under reference were promoted to the ASP cadre within their respective Circles prior to the implementation of centralized cadre management. The centralization has only impacted officials who were not promoted earlier due to non-availability of vacancies in their respective circles.
27. They further say that it is also important to note that for promotions to PS Group 'B', the all-India Seniority list maintained at the Directorate level has been in use even prior to cadre centralization. Thus, the cadre restructuring has had no impact on the procedure or prospects for promotion to PS Group 'B'. They said that in view of the above, centralized cadre management introduced in July-2022 is a SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 21 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE forward-looking administrative decision, and does not affect any promotions or seniority already granted prior to its implementation.
28. The respondents submit that it is a matter of concern that the cadre management issues are being erroneously and perhaps deliberately conflated with the matter of inter-se seniority, seemingly to mislead the Hon'ble Tribunal. It is respectfully submitted that the instant OA pertains specifically to the preparation of the all-India seniority list of Inspector Posts, which is governed by DOPT's statutory instructions. This is entirely distinct from cadre management arrangements, which are governed by an administrative framework and do not influence inter-se seniority. Hence, they pray to reject the Original Application.
29. Further, on 10.7.2025, the respondents filed a reply statement to the Memo filed by the applicants wherein they assert that the All India Seniority Lists (AISL) of Inspector Posts (IP) cadre were framed following the prevailing DoPT instructions and on the basis of advice of DoPT instruction issued from time to time. They further assert that the order for centralization of cadre management of IP and ASP, issued by Department of Posts vide Letter dated 12.07.2022, was an administrative restructuring measure aimed at ensuring uniformity SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 22 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE across the cadre. With this development, the management of both IP and ASP cadres have been centralized at the Directorate level, including maintenance of reservation rosters, conduct of DPCs for promotion to ASP, and other related functions. Approval of the competent authority has already been obtained for the change in the appointing authority, and necessary amendments to the Recruitment Rules are currently under process to formalize this structural change.
30. They further submit that the Circle-level seniority lists prepared prior to centralization of IP & ASP cadre were intended solely for promotions to the ASP cadre within the Circle. It is submitted that centralization of cadre management is a prospective administrative measure, intended to ensure uniformity in promotional timelines across Circles. All applicants under reference were promoted to the ASP cadre within their respective Circles prior to the implementation of centralized cadre management. The centralization has only impacted officials who were not promoted earlier due to non- availability of vacancies in their respective circles. The respondents further say that the initial draft of All India Combined Seniority List for the years 2001-2002 of Inspector Posts Cadre was issued vide Department's letter No.7-1/2015/SPB-II dated 17.05.2016, revised on SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 23 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE 09.06.2016 and uploaded to the website of India Post for comments of all the stakeholders. Various representations were received from promotee officials with respect to the draft seniority list and after examination of all the issues, the matter of fixation of inter-se- seniority was referred to DoP&T for advice or confirmation of the stand of the Department in connection with fixation of inter-se- seniority of Inspector Posts cadre.
a) The DoP&T observed as under:-
" ...... in case CGLE 2001 and 2002 had been held separately, the cut-off date for checking eligibility for age etc would have been different. It is not possible to segregate seniority lists for 2001 & 2002 based on rankings obtained in CGLE-2003 when the SSC had provided a combined list of 168 candidates who were recommended on the basis of CGLE-2003 "
b) The DoP&T further advised that ".... it seems appropriate that successful candidates of CGLE-2003 belonging to Department of Posts are treated as en-bloc belonging to the recruitment year 2003 and their relative seniority needs to be fixed in accordance with Department of Personnel & Training's OM. No 22011/7/86-Est. (D) dated 03.07.1986.... "
So far as fixation of inter-se-seniority of CGLE-2003 direct recruits with promoted officers are concerned they may be interpolated with the promotee of the same recruitment year in SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 24 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE accordance with the principles contained in DoPT's OM dated 03.07.1986/04.03.2014.
31. The respondents contend that, in accordance with DoPT's advice, the final draft All India combined seniority lists of Inspector Posts for the years 2001 and 2002 were prepared by placing all departmental promotees in order of marks obtained by them and issued/uploaded on the website of the Department vide letter No 7- 1/2015-SPB-11 dated 19.2.2018 for inviting comments of all stakeholders. After considering all the representations, the final all India Combined Seniority lists of Inspector Posts cadre for the 2001 and 2002 were issued vide Directorate's Letter No. 7- 1/2015-SPB-II (Pt.11) dated 26.12.2018 and recirculated vide Letter No. 7-1/2015- SPN-II (Pt. II) dated 07.02.2019. Consequently, on the basis of advice of the Department of Personnel & Training, a clarification regarding preparation of inter-se- seniority of direct recruit candidates recommended through CGLE-2003 by Circles by interpolating with the departmental promotees of the same exam year i.e., LDCE 2003.
Similarly, direct recruits recommended through CGLE2004 with the departmental promotees of LDCE-2004 and so on.
SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 25 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
32. The respondents further say that the order for centralization of cadre management of IP and ASP, issued by the Department of Posts vide letter dated 12.07.2022, is a prospective administrative measure, intended to ensure uniformity in promotional timelines across Circles.
Approval of the competent authority has already been obtained for the change in the appointing authority, and necessary amendments to the Recruitment Rules are currently under process to formalize this structural change.
33. The respondents further say that the All India Seniority Lists (AISL) of Inspector Posts (IP) cadres were framed following the prevailing DoPT instructions and on the basis of advice of DOPT issued from time to time Para-8 of DOPT ID note Dy. No. 1272774/JS(E)/2017, dated 21.12.2017 (copy enclosed Annexure R 13 ) addressed to the Department of Post provides that:
"So far as fixation of inter-se-seniority of CGLE 2003 direct recruits and promoted officers are concerned they may be interpolated with the promotes of the same recruitment year in accordance with the principles contained in this Department's OM dated 03.07.1986/04.03.2014"
34. The respondents further contend that all India Seniority List of Inspector Posts for the year 2003 were prepared as per the applicable SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 26 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE interpretation of DoPT's clarification stated above. The seniority list of Inspector Posts for the year 2004 onwards was also prepared in the same manner. The respondents further contend that the Department of Posts adheres to the instructions issued by the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) from time to time. Accordingly, all decisions relating to the finalization of the All India Seniority List of Inspector Posts cadre have been taken by strictly in accordance with DoPT's OM and clarifications issued thereof. In relation to the applicants' reference to the Department's letter dated 07.05.2025, it is respectfully submitted that there is no stay granted in any related legal proceeding which restrains the Department from effecting promotions based on the finalized seniority lists. Therefore, the Department has acted within its administrative mandate and in compliance with prevailing instructions while initiating promotion-related processes.
35. The respondents further say that the matter is subjudice before the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi and any inconsistent or divergent decisions in similar matters pending across different Benches may result in disparity, potentially resulting in administrative inconvenience and unrest. Hence, to ensure uniformity and avoid conflicting outcomes, the Hon'ble Tribunal may SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 27 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE be pleased to hold or decide the present matter accordingly, in the interest of equity and uniformity.
36. On 8.8.2025, the applicants placed on record our co-ordinate Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Patna order in O.A No.406/2024 dated 7.8.2025 asserting that it is on a similar matter and the same issues are decided therein, and they sought the same relief for themselves. As the respondents wanted some time to go through the same, further time was given and when the case came up for final hearing on 4.9.2025, parties were also heard on this order of C.A.T Patna Bench dated 7.8.2025 in O.A No.406/2024.
37. We have carefully gone through all the additional submissions in addition to the earlier submissions and considered the rival contentions.
Our analysis:
38. From the averments of the parties and rival contentions, it is evident that the main divergence between the applicants and the respondents and the issues in contention are related to the various legal developments of inter-se seniority of promotees and direct recruits in Indian Service Law jurisprudence. Closer scrutiny of all the facts placed before us is that following facts are not disputed that as per the SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 28 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE existing service and cadre rules, the seniority of Inspectors of Posts were maintained at the circle level and only very recently the department has initiated an All India seniority for the Inspectors for giving them promotions to the cadre of certain All India level promotional grades, i.e., Postal Services Group B cadre. As the relevance of creating de-novo all India seniority is not denied, hence, we deem it pertinent that there is no point deliberating on the service recruitment rules amendment regarding maintaining circle level cadre or all India cadre with roster and seniority, as those may not materially alter the final decision on the main issue of rules and O.M relevant to create de-novo all India seniority list.
39. It is not disputed that the applicants are the promotees from LDCE in the years between 2004-2007 (for the year 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007) and for the years 2004-2008 certain circle level seniorities were prepared. And for the vacancy years of 2006-2008 certain other direct recruits had been appointed through the selection by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) in the years 2007, 2008 and 2009; and their inter-se seniority between the applicants who are promotees appointed through LDCE and the direct recruits appointed through the SSC who joined and appointed in the years 2007-2009 were earlier SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 29 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE settled at the circle level as per the principles outlined in DoP&T O.M of 2008 dated 3.3.2008 and the two 1986 O.Ms of DoP&T, and based on which at circle level some promotions to the grade of Assistant Superintendent of Posts were also granted in the years 2012-2015. As no all India seniorities were made earlier it was initiated de-novo some times in the year 2016 onwards.
40. The main contention of the respondents are that for preparing the de-novo all India seniority of Inspectors of Post they have obtained the opinion of the DoP&T, and as advised they have prepared the de- novo all India seniority as per rules. And they point out that as per the opinion of the DoP&T contained in Annexure R-13 particularly para 8 it mentioned:
"So far as fixation of inter-se seniority on CGLE 2003 direct recruits with promoted officers are concerned they may be interpolated with the promotes of the same recruitment year in accordance with the principles contained in this Department's O.M dated 03.07.1986/04.03.2014."
41. We are able to see that this note was prepared around 21.12.2017. The respondents further assert that they have also relied another similar document which is filed as Annexure R-4. Annexure R-4 notings are prepared around 26.10.2017. It is not clear to us how the document Annexure R-4 was relevant for inter-se seniority of SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 30 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE promotes and direct recruits, as the respondents have relied mostly the paragraph 8 of the Annexure R-13 and prepared the so called de-novo all India seniority of Inspectors of Post as per the principles laid down in the O.M dated 3.7.1986 and 4.3.2014. And in doing so the respondents have asserted that as they were not fettered by the earlier circle level seniority which was prepared as per the earlier DoP&T O.Ms of 1986/2008, and hence even through there are changes in the inter-se seniority of certain promotees and direct recruit Inspectors, the department was right as they have strictly followed the guidelines provided by the DoP&T in the said note dated 21.12.2017. The main contention of the respondents is that as the all India seniority was not prepared earlier and it is being de-novo prepared, it cannot be based on the O.M of 2008 referred by the applicants which were clearly superseded when they were advised by the DoP&T to prepare it as per the instructions contained in DoP&T O.M dated 4.3.2014 and not 3.3.2008, vide their note dated 21.12.2017 (Annexure R-13)
42. Whereas the main contention of the applicants is that preparation of seniority is primarily governed based on the prevailing rules in force when the person joined the cadre on appointment or promotion and not on when this seniority list is prepared. Hence, even SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 31 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE if the all India seniority list is prepared de-novo much later after lapse of more than a decade the inter-se seniority of the promotees and the direct recruits as per the emphatic assertion of the applicants will be determined by the laws which were prevailing at the time of their own and their rival direct recruits joined the cadre on their respective appointment (SSC) and promotion (LDCE). Hence from the rival contention of the parties for our consideration, following issues come up for determination.
Q.1. If for the years 2004-2009 (when the applicants and some of the direct recruits joined the cadre) , a fresh all India seniority list is to be prepared on a certain date say 2017 onwards, whether the rules prevailing at the time of the parties joining the cadre will be applicable for determining their inter-se seniority for preparing a de-novo all India seniority or the rules which were prevailing at the time of the preparation of the new all India seniority list afresh in 2017 or 2019 was relevant ? Q.2. Whether the second DoP&T advise as contained in Annexure R-13 was correct and as per the rule to guide the preparation of all India seniority of the year 2004-2009 as asserted by the respondents ?
1. If so, what orders?
SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 32 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
43. From the averments of the parties, it is not denied that as the examples given by the applicants that in the all India seniority list many of the applicants' seniorities have been changed when compared to the circle level seniority and they have become juniors to many of their erstwhile direct recruit juniors in the circle level seniority.
44. Further, to understand the subject we must first recapitulate the legal developments of inter-se seniority between the promotees and direct recruits in Indian service jurisprudence. It starts with the first O.M dated 7.2.1986 in No.3501/2/60-Estt(D) of DoP&T (Annexure A-3) with subject, "General Principles for determining the seniority of various categories of persons employed I Central Services", which mainly speaks of :
"OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: General Principles for determining the Seniority of various categories of persons employed I Central Services.
As the Ministry of Finance etc. are aware the General Principles for determination of Seniority in the Central Services are contained in the Annexure to Ministry of Home Affairs O. M. No. 9/11/1955 RPS dated 22/12/1959. According to Paragraph No. 6 of the said Annexure, the relative Seniority of direct recruits and promotees shall be determined according to rotation of vacancies between the direct recruits and the promotees which will be based on the quota of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively in the recruitment circles.. In the Explanatory Memorandum to these Principles it has been stated that a roster is required to be maintained based on SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 33 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE the reservation of vacancies for direct recruitment and promotion in the recruitment circles. Thus, where appointment to a grade is to be made 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion form a lower grade, the inter-se-seniority of direct recruits and promotees is determined on 1:1 basis.
2. While the above mentioned principle was working satisfactorily in cases where direct recruitment and promotion kept pace with each other and recruitment could also be made to the full extent of the quotas as prescribed in cases where there was delay in direct recruitment or promotion or where enough number of direct recruits or promotees did not become available there was difficulty in determining seniority. In such cases, the practice followed at present is that, the slots meant for direct recruits or promotees which could not be filled up, were left vacant, and when direct recruits or promotees became available through later examinations or selections such persons occupied the vacant slots, thereby became senior to persons who were already working in the grade on regular basis. In some cases, where there was short fall in direct recruitment in two or more consecutive years, this resulted in direct recruits of later years taking seniority over some of the promotees with fairly long years of regular service already to their credit. This matter had also come up got consideration in various court cases both before the High Courts and the Supreme Court and in the relevant judgment had brought out the in appropriate of direct recruits several cases of later years becoming senior to promotees with long year of service.
3. This matter which was also discussed in the National Council has been engaging the attention of the Government for quite some time and it has been decided that in future. While the principle of rotation of quotas will still be followed for determining the inter-se-seniority of direct recruits and promotees, the present practice of keeping vacant slots for being filled up by direct recruits of later years, thereby giving then unintended seniority over promotees who are already in position, would be dispensed with. Thus, if adequate member of direct recruits do not become available in any particular year, rotation of quotas for purpose of determining seniority would take place only to the extent of the available direct recruits and the promotees. In other words, to the extent direct recruits are not available, the promotees will be bunched together at the bottom of the seniority list, below the last position up to which it is possible to determine seniority on the basis of rotation of quotas with reference to the actual number of direct recruits who become available. The unfiled direct recruitment quota vacancies would, however, be carried forwarded and added to the corresponding direct recruitment vacancies of the next year (and to subsequent years where necessary) for taking SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 34 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE action for direct recruitment for the total number recording to the usual practice. Thereafter, in that year while seniority will be determined between the direct recruits and promotees to the extent of number of vacancies for direct recruits and promotees as determined according to the quota for that year, the additional direct recruits selected against the carried forward vacancies of the previous year would be placed enables below the last promottee (or direct recruit as the case may be) in the Seniority list based on rotation of vacancies for the year. The same principle holds good in determining seniority in the event of carry forward if any, of direct recruitment or promotion quota vacancies (as the case may be) in the subsequent years."
45. This O.M was followed by another O.M dated 3.7.1986 of DoP&T in No.22011/7/86-Estt(D) (Annexure A-4) with a subject, "Seniority - Consolidated orders on", which mentions the following:
"OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: SENIORITY Consolidated orders on The undersigned is directed to say that instructions have been issued by this Department from time to time laying down the principles for determining seniority of persons appointed to services and posts under the Central Government. For facility of reference, the important orders on the subject have been consolidated in this Office Memorandum. The number and date of the original communication has been quoted in the margin so that the users may refer to it to understand fully the context in which the order in question was issued.
SENIORITY OF DIRECT RECRUITS AND PROMOTEES 2.1 The relative seniority of all direct recruits is determined by the order of merit in which they are selected for Such appointment on the recommendations of the U.P.S. or other selecting authority, persons appointed as a result of an earlier selection being senior to those appointed as a result of a subsequent selection.
2.3 Where promotions are made on the basis of selection by a D.P.C., the seniority of such promotees shall be in the order in which they are recommended for such promotion by the Committee, Where promotions are made on the basis of seniority, subject to the rejection of the unfit, the seniority of persons considered fit for promotion at the same time SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 35 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE shall be the same as the relative seniority in the lower grade from which they are promoted. Where, however, a person is considered as unfit for promotion and is superseded by a junior such persons shall not, if he is subsequently found suitable and promoted, take seniority in the higher grade over the junior persons who had superseded him.
2.3 Where persons recruited or promoted initially on a temporary basis are confirmed subsequently in an order different from the order of merit indicated at the time of their appointment, seniority shall follow the order of confirmation and not the original order of merit.
2.4.1 The relative seniority of direct recruits and of promotees shall be determined according to the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and promotees which shall be based on the quota of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively in the Recruitment Rules.
2.4.2 If adequate number of direct recruits do not become available in any particular year, rotation of quotas for the purpose of determining seniority would take place only to the extent of the available direct recruits and the promotes.
In other words, to the extent direct recruits are not available the promotees will be bunched together at the bottom of the seniority list below the last position up to which it is possible to determines seniority, on the basis of rotation of quotas with reference to the actual number of direct recruits who become available. The unfilled direct recruitment quota vacancies would, however, be carried forward and added to the corresponding direct recruitment vacancies of the next year (and to subsequent years where necessary) for taking action for direct recruitment for the total number according to the usual practice. Thereafter in that year while seniority will be determined between direct recruits and promoters, to the extent of the number of vacancies for direct recruits and promotees as determined according to the quota for that year, the additional, direct recruits selected against the carried forward vacancies of the previous year would be placed en-bloc below the last promotee (or direct recruit as the case may be), in the seniority list based on the rotation of vacancies for that year. The same principle holds good for determining seniority in the event of carry forward, if any, of direct recruitment or promotion quota vacancies(as the case may be) in the subsequent year."
SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 36 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
46. This was followed by another O.M dated 3.3.2008 (Annexure A-5) in No.20011/1/2006-Estt.(D).
"OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: Consolidated instructions on seniority contained in DOP&T O.M. No.22011/7/1986-Estt. (D) dated 3-7-1986- Clarification regarding.
The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department's consolidated instructions contained in O.M.No.22011/7/1986-Estt. (D) dated 3.7.1986 laying down the principles on determination of seniority of persons appointed to services/posts under the Central Government.
2. Para 2.4.1 and 2.4.2 of the O.M. dated 3.7.1986 contains the following provisions: -
2.4.1 The relative seniority of direct recruits and of promotees shall be determined according to the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and promotees, which shall be based on the quota of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively in the Recruitment Rules.
2.4.2 If adequate number of direct recruits does not become available in any particular year, rotation of quotas for the purpose of determining seniority would take place only to the extent of the available direct recruits and the promotees.
3. Some references have been received seeking clarifications regarding the term 'available' used in the preceding para of the O.M. dated 3.7.1986. It is hereby clarified that while the inter-se seniority of direct recruits and promotees is to be fixed on the basis of the rotation of quota of vacancies, the year of availability, both in the case of direct recruits as well as the promotees, for the purpose of rotation and fixation of seniority, shall be the actual year of appointment after declaration of results/selection and completion of pre-appointment formalities as prescribed. It is further clarified that when appointments against unfilled vacancies are made in subsequent year or years either by direct recruitment or promotion, the Persons so appointed shall not get seniority of any earlier year (viz. year of Vacancy/panel or year in which recruitment process is initiated) but should get the seniority of the year in which they are appointed on substantive basis. The year of availability will be the vacancy year in which a candidate of the particular batch of selected direct recruits or an officer of the particular batch of promotees joins the post/service.
SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 37 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
4. Cases of seniority already decided with reference to any other interpretation of the term 'available as contained in O.M. dated 3.7.1986 need not be reopened.
5. Hindi version will follow."
47. One has to keep in mind the last paragraph 4 of this O.M which emphatically mentions that Cases of seniority already decided with reference to any other interpretation of the term 'available' as contained in O.M dated 3.7.1986 need not be reopened.
48. As enunciated in these three Office Memorandums, two of 1986 and one of 2008, the main determinant of inter-se seniority of promotees and direct recruits were date of appointment, promotion and joining the cadre, until the crucial judgment of N.R Parmar v. Union of India and Ors ((2012) 13 SCC 340), dated 27.11.2012 which brought in a very new element in determining inter-se seniority of direct recruits and promotees, and it critically changed the criteria and an element of vacancy year came into reckoning for the direct recruitment, and principle of inter-se seniority changed to vacancy year to be counted for seniority of direct recruits even though their appointment happens in later years. A new concept of "back-dating"
of "retrospective seniority" was permitted for direct recruits based on vacancy year, and so the new concept evolved that direct recruits SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 38 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE and promotees were to be placed on the seniority list as per the year of vacancy and not the date of joining. The net effect was to give retrospective seniority to direct recruits, disturbing the seniority list in many departments.
49. Based on this, an O.M was issued on 4.3.2014 (Annexure A-
11) with a subject, "Inter-se seniority of direct recruits and promotees instructions thereof" in No.20011/1/2012-Estt.(D), which mentions as follows:
"OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: Inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees - instructions thereof The undersigned is directed to refer to the subject mentioned above and to say that the fundamental principles of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees in Central Civil Services/posts were laid down in the Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT) O.M. No. 9/11/55-RPS dated 29.12.1959 which provided, inter alia, that the relative seniority of direct recruits and of promotees shall be determined according to the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and promotees, which shall be based on the quotas of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively, in the Recruitment Rules.
2. The carrying forward of unfilled slots of a vacancy year, for being filled up by direct recruits of later years, was dispensed with through modified instructions contained in DOPT Ο.Μ. No.35014/2/80-Estt.(D) dated 7.2.1986 which provides that rotation of quotas for purpose of determining seniority would take place only to the extent of the available direct recruits and the promotees. The unfilled direct recruitment/promotion quota vacancies would be carried forward and added to the corresponding direct recruitment/promotion quota vacancies of the next year (and to subsequent years where necessary) for taking action for the total number of direct recruitment/promotion according to the usual practice. Thereafter, in that year, SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 39 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE while seniority will be determined between direct recruits and promotees, to the extent of the number of vacancies for direct recruits and promotees, as determined according to the quota for that year, the additional direct recruits/promotees selected against the carried forward vacancies of the previous year, would be placed en-bloc below the last promotee/direct recruit, as the case may be, in the seniority list, based on the rotation of vacancies for that year.
3. All the existing instructions on seniority were consolidated by DOPT through a single O.M. No. 22011/7/86-Estt(D) dated 03.07.1986.
4. In view of divergent stance taken by different Ministries/Departments on interpretation of 'available direct recruits and promotees' in the context of OM dated 7.2.86, the DoPT had issued O.M. No. 20011/1/2005-Estt. (D) dated 3.3.2008 which provided that the actual year of appointment, both in the case of direct recruits and promotees, would be reckoned as the year of availability for the purpose of rotation and fixation of inter se seniority.
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 non-existent/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 Q.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 filling up of vacancies to the recruiting agency in the case of direct SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 40 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE 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. UOI & 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."
50. One must keep in mind that paragraph 5 (h) and (i) of this O.M was very important whereas paragraph 5(h) mentions:
" 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 SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 41 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE judgment in Civil Appeal No.7514- 7515/2005 in the case of N.R.Parmar v. UOI & Ors."
51. And in the said O.M the para 5(i) stated that :
" The case of seniority already settled with reference to the applicable interpretation of the term availability, as contained in DoPT O.M dated 7.2.1986/3.7.86 may not be reopened."
52. For some time, the ruling of the Apex Court in the case of N.R.Parmar (supra) ruled the field of inter-se seniority fixation of direct recruits and the promotees. Until another order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.Meghachandra Singh & Ors. v. Ningam Siro & Ors in Civil Appeal No.8833-8835 of 2019 ((2020) 5 SCC
689) revised the whole interpretation and based on which another O.M was issued on 13.8.2021 (Annexure A-12) with subject, "Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.8833-8835 of 2019 of K.Meghachandra Singh and Others v. Ningam Siro & Ors - revised instructions relating to seniority of direct recruits and promotees and inter-se seniority thereof- reg." in No.20011/2/2019-Estt.(D) which mentioned the following:
" OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject:Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 8833-8835 of 2019 of K. Meghachandra SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 42 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE Singh & Ors. Vs Ningam Sirs & Ors - revised instructions relating to seniority of direct recruits and promotees and later-se seniority thereof-reg The undersigned is directed to say that the fundamental principles of determining inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees in Central Civil Services/posts were laid down in the Department of Personnel & Training (DOPT) O.M. No. 9/11/55-RPS dated 29.12.1959, which inter la provided that, the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees shall be determined according to the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and promotees, which shall be based on the quotas of vacancies, provided in the Recruitment Rules for direct recruitment and promotion respectively.
2 The carry forward of unfilled slots of a vacancy year. to be filled up by direct recruits of later years, was dispensed with through modified instructions contained in DoPT O.M. No. 35014/2/80-Est(D) dated 7.2.1986 which provides that rotation of quotas for purpose of determining seniority would take place only to the extent of available direct recruits and the promotees. The unfilled direct recruitment/promotion quota vacancies would be carried forward and added to the corresponding direct recruitment/promotion quota vacancies of the next year (and to subsequent years where necessary) for determining the total number of direct recruitment or promotion vacancies to filled up as per usual practice. For determining inter-se seniority between direct recruits and promotees, it would be done as per rotation of quota to the extent of number of vacancies for direct recruits and promotees, as determined according to the quota for that year and the additional direct recruits/promotees selected against the carried forward vacancies of the previous year, to be placed en-bloc below the last promotee/direct recruit, as the case may be, in the seniority list. All the existing instructions on seniority were consolidated by DoPT through a single O.M. No. 22011/7/86-Estt(D) dated 03.07.1986.
3 Subsequently, vide O.M. No. 20011/1/2006-Estt (D) dated 3.3.2008, the term 'available' as provided in OMs dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 was sought to be clarified, wherein it was clarified that the actual year of appointment, both in the case of direct recruits and promotees, would be reckoned as the year of availability for the purpose of rotation and fixation of inter se seniority. This was however, challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 7514-7515/2005 in the case of N.R. Parmar v/s Union of India & Others. In its judgement dated 27.11.2012 in the said case, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the available direct recruits and promotees, for SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 43 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE assignment of inter se seniority, would refer to the direct recruits and promotees who are appointed against the vacancies of a particular recruitment year, where the recruitment year shall be the year in which the recruitment process for either of the modes of recruitment (direct recruitment or promotion) for particular vacancy year is initiated viz, initiation of recruitment process against a vacancy year would mean the date of sending of requisition for filling up of vacancies to the recruiting agency in the case of direct recruits or the date on which a proposal, complete in all respects, is sent to UPSC/Chairman DPC for convening of DPC to fill up vacancies earmarked for promotion.
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 Civil Appeal No 8833- 8835 of 2019 [arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 19565-19567 of 2019] in the matter of K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. Vs Ningam Siro & Ors. In its Order dated 19.11.2019 in CA. No. 8833-35/2019 of K. Meghachandra Singh &Ors. Vs Ningam Siro & Ors, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has overruled the decision of the Court in NR Parmar case.
5. In para 40 of the Order dated 19.11.2019, the Hon'ble Court inter-alia held that "the law on the issue is correctly declared in J.C. Patnaik (Supra). 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." Further, in para 38, the Hon'ble Court had held as under:
"38. When we carefully read the judgment in N. R. Parmar (Supra), it appears to us that the referred OMs (dated 07.02.1986 and 03.07.1986) were not properly construed in the judgment. Contrary to the eventual finding, the said two OMs had made it clear that seniority of the direct recruits be declared only from the date of appointment and not from the date of initiation of recruitment process. But surprisingly, the judgment while referring to the illustration given in the OM in fact overlooks the effect of the said illustration. According to us, the illustration extracted in the N.R. Parmar (Supra) itself makes it clear that the vacancies which were intended for direct recruitment in a particular year (1986) which were filled in the next year (1987) could be taken into consideration only in the subsequent year's seniority list but not in the seniority list of 1986. In fact, this SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 44 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE was indicated in the two OMS dated 07.02.1986 and 03.07.1986 and that is why the Government issued the subsequent OM on 03.03.2008 by way of clarification of the two earlier OMs."
6. The determination of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in its Order dated 19.11.2019 in K. Meghachandra Singh case, has been carefully examined in consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs, and the following principles have emerged:-
(i) 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 determining vacancies to be filled by the respective quotas in a recruitment year. The term 'recruitment year' shall mean the year in which the vacancy arises. However, inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees, who are appointed against the vacancies of respective quota, would 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.
(ii) The terms 'recruitment and appointment' have to be read harmoniously and the determination of seniority for recruitees would depend on their actual appointment and not the initiation of recruitment process itself. It thus follows that the seniority of direct recruits and promotees henceforth stands delinked from the vacancy/year of vacancy.
(iii) The source of legitimacy of determination of seniority would be with reference to the date of joining of a person against a vacancy, irrespective of the fact that it may have arisen in the previous year(s) and not being a carried forward vacancy of any quota.
(iv) If adequate number of direct recruits (or promotees) do not become available, "rotation of quotas for the purpose of determining seniority, would stop after the available direct recruits and promotees are assigned their slots on joining in a particular year.
(v) The term available', both in the case of direct recruits as well as promotees, for the purpose of rotation and fixation of seniority, shall be the actual year of appointment after declaration of results/selection and completion of pre-
appointment formalities as prescribed. SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 45 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
(vi) Thus, appointees who join in the concerned recruitment year and those who join in subsequent year(s), would figure in the seniority list of the respective years of their being appointed. To that extent it may not be necessary to go into the question of quota meant for direct recruits and promotees to find out as to the year in which the vacancy arose against which the recruitment is made.
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. 20011/1/2012-Estl.(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. 20011/1/2012-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 finalised by 18.11.2019, shall so 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 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 Cadre Authority before 19.11.2019, but where all appointments, subsequent to the initiation of to cases where the recruitment process has been initiated by the administrative Department/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- SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 46 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
(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 ie. 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.
(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 inter-se 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 be bunched together in accordance with their position in the panel approved for promotion. Similarly, if no promotee is available in that SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 47 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE 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.
These provisions shall come into effect from 19.11.2019 onwards.
All Ministries/Departments are requested to bring these instructions to the notice of all concerned."
53. In this O.M, inter-alia other things, paragraph 7(iii) is very crucial which mentions the following:
" 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 finalised by 18.11.2019, shall also be governed by the provisions of O.Ms dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 read with O.M dated 4.3.2014, unless where a different formulation/manner of determination of seniority has been decided by any Tribunal or Court."
54. Now, overall, since 1986 we have two of the Office Memorandums of 1986 (dated 7.2.1986 and 3.7.1986), one of 2008 O. M, another O.M of 2014 and finally the O.M of 2021, enunciating distinct nuanced principles of inter-se seniority of the Direct Recruits SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 48 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE and the Promotees based on different sets of rulings and rules which govern the inter-se seniority of direct recruits and promotees at different points of time when those O.Ms and court rulings held the field. As we flagged earlier, the main issue to be decided by us is, as to based on which of these set of O.Ms the respondents should have decided the inter-se seniority of prmotees and direct recruits of the years 2004-2009 if de-novo their all India seniority was being prepared in the year 2017 or 2019 or subsequently ?
55. Closer scrutiny of the above five Office Memorandums clearly shows us that the determination of inter-se seniority of promotees and direct recruits for public employment in India has been on slightly nuanced principles at different points of time. Broadly, we may see the following distinct time phases:
56. The first phase is, that is determined by O.M dated 7.2.1986 and 3.7.1986, which were further consolidated in the DoP&T O.M dated 3.3.2008 and these principles govern the inter-se seniority of promotees and direct recruits up to the date of the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in N.R. Parmar v. Union of India and Others on 27.11.2012. So, clearly, as per these Office Memorandums, as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.R. Parmar's case, SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 49 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE which was prospective in application, the new principles laid down therein were applicable from the judgment date onwards, as enunciated clearly in the O.M dated 4.3.2014. So, the first phase was before this date, 27.11.2012 governed by the two O.Ms of 1986 and another DoP&T O.M dated 3.3.2008.
57. The second phase of nuanced interpretation of inter-se seniority of promotees and direct recruits started from the date of the Apex Court rulings in the N.R. Parmar case supra on 27.11.2012 and until it was reversed by the succeeding judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 8833-8835 of 2019 of K. Meghachandra Singh and Ors. v. Ningam Siro and Ors. ((2020) 5 SCC 689), which subsequently was incorporated into an O.M of DoP&T and notified on 13th August 2021. However, the said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was dated 19.11.2019 and this judgment in K. Meghachandra Singh was also prospective in application from that date 19.11.2019 only. Hence we may infer that the second phase of inter-se seniority which were governed by the principles laid down in the case of N.R. Parmar (supra) was effective between the dates 27.11.2012 (N.R.Parmar judgment date) to 18.11.2019 (K.Meghachandra Singh judgment date). It is to be kept SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 50 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE in mind that it was clearly mentioned in the O.M dated 4.3.2014 in para 5(i) that the cases of seniority already settled with reference to the applicable interpretation of the term availability as contained in DoP&T O.M dated 7.2.1986/3.7.86 may not be reopened. And in paragraph 5(h) it was mentioned that 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 v. Union of India and others.
58. So clearly, the principles of N.R.Parmar were applicable only between these two dates (from 27.11.2012 to 18.11.2019). But in this circular dated 4.3.2014, it is nowhere clarified what it meant by saying that seniority already settled with reference to the applicable interpretation of the term availability, as contained in DoPT O.M dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 may not be reopened, meaning if anything which were to be governed by the rules prevailing between the two dates on 27.11.2012 to 18.11.2019 if not already fixed how it should be determined later. Or any seniority determination case between the promotees and direct recruits pertaining to the period before the relevant date 27.11.2012 (in the case of N.R.Parmar) and were not settled even after 27.11.2012 will be subsequently settled ? SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 51 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
59. However, we may find some light on those issues after examining the last DoP&T O.M dated 13.8.2021, which came after the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in K. Meghachandra Singh (supra). Revised instructions were issued wherein it is clear that as the interpretation of seniority determinants were completely reversed from the earlier judgment in the case of N.R. Parmar (supra) from the date of the subsequent Meghachandra Singh judgment i.e., 19.11.2019 onwards. O.M dated 13.08.2021 clearly and emphatically mentions in paragraph 7(iii) that, in the case of direct recruits and promotes 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 O. M dated 4.3.2014, unless where a different formulation/manner of determination of seniority has been decided by any Tribunal or Court.
60. This view of the government is very relevant to interpret what should be the fate of cases of unsettled seniority before N.R. Parmar's judgment on 27.11.2012 and such unsettled seniority which is between 27.11.2012 and the date of judgment of K. Meghachandra SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 52 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE Singh's case in Hon'ble Supreme Court on 19.11.2019, or thereafter. If the para. 7(iii) of the master Office Memorandum dated 13.8.2021 is applied to understand the fate of seniority of those recruitees whether by direct recruitment or by promotion and who joined during the period before 27.11.2012 but whose seniority is still unsettled, by the ratio as stated in paragraph 7(iii) of the said O.M dated 13.08.2021 will have to be by inference governed by the principles, as contained in the DoP&T O.M relevant for the said earlier period. In the cases before us it is not denied that the applicants before us were promotees selected by LDCE and had joined the cadre of the Inspector of Post in the years between 2004-2007 (2004, 2005, 2006, 2007), and their rival direct recruits (from SSC) were selected and joined between 2007- 2009 (2007, 2008, 2009) much before the Hon'ble Apex Court passed the order in N.R Parmar v. Union of India supra on 27.11.2012. Hence, in our considered opinion, such cases will be governed not by the DoP&T O.M of 4.3.2014, but all the O. Ms which preceded the said O.M i.e., the O.M dated 7.2.1986, 3.7.1986 and the O. M dated 3.3.2008
61. And in the cases of direct recruits and promotees appointed and who joined during the period between 27.11.2012 and 18.11.2019, SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 53 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE and if their seniority was not settled in time, such cases will only be governed by the O. M dated 4.3.2014, and accordingly the cases of direct recruits and promotees appointed and joined after 18.11.2019 shall be governed by the judgment in the case of K. Meghachandra Singh and Ors v. Ningam Siro & Ors. as elaborated in the O.M dated 13.8.2021.
62. Now in the light of these discussions, we may examine the case before us. The facts are not denied that in the case of seniority of direct recruits (selected by SSC and joined in the years 2007, 2008, 2009) and promotees selected by LDCE and joined in the year 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 who were appointed during 2004-08, all of them were selected and had joined the cadre of the Inspector of Post much before the coming of the judgment in the case of N.R Parmar on 27.11.2012 and hence the O.M dated 4.3.2014 is not applicable in deciding their inter-se all India seniority in these cases, even if their de-novo seniority has to be decided in the year 2017 or later. In our considered opinion, these cases have to be determined by the rules which existed before coming of the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in the case of N.R. Parmar in 2012 (or O.M dated 4.3.2014). And the governing principle in these cases at hand has to be strictly as enunciated in the SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 54 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE earlier O.Ms dated 7.2.1986, 3.7.1986 and further consolidated instructions in the O.M dated 3.3.2008, which prevailed before the N.R.Parmar Judgment (supra).
63. Now let us consider the assertion of the respondents that they have prepared all India seniority de-novo, and so, they were not bound by the earlier circle level seniority, and they are governed by the principles as contained in DoP&T O.M specifically given in their advise dated 21.12.2017, which is presented before us as Annexure R13. And as in Annexure R-13 the DoP&T has advised them in paragraph 8 dated 21.12.2017 that so far as fixation of inter-se- seniority of CGLE 2003 direct recruits with promoted officers are concerned they may be interpolated with the promotes of the same recruitment year in accordance with the principles contained in this Department's O.M dated 3.7.1986 /04.03.2014.
64. It is pertinent to note that the said DoP&T clarifications at Annexure R-13 was dated 21.12.2017, much before the judgment in K. Meghachandra Singh came and was much earlier than the DoP&T lead O.M dated 13.8.2021. And clearly the said clarifications had no benefit of the subsequent Apex Court judgment and order in the case of K.Meghachandra Singh (supra) followed by the DoP&T opinion SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 55 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE dated 13.8.2021 in their O.M No.20011/2/2019-Estt.(D) wherein the DoP&T had mentioned at paragraph 7(iii) that 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 O.M dated 4.3.2014, unless where a different formulation/manner of determination of seniority has been decided by any Tribunal or Court.
65. Based on the DoP&T O.M dated 13.08.2021 para 7 (iii) one can easily interpret other periods and the relevant rules prevailing in those periods based on this correct opinion of the DoP&T that the apex court judgment and order in N.R. Parmar supra was to govern the seniority of direct recruits and promotees appointed and joined during the period between 27.11.2012 to 18.11.2019 only.
66. Hence we are of the considered opinion that the only conclusion based on the above clause in the O.M dated 13.08.2021 could be that before the date 27.11.2012, if there was direct recruitment and promotions, such appointments and joining of duties and the inter-se seniority of such direct recruits and SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 56 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE promotees if not already settled and the gradation list was to be prepared subsequently de-novo (for example in the present case gradation list for 2003 to 2008 being prepared in the year 2017 or later) will not be governed by the O.M dated 4.3.2014, and it will be governed by all the O. Ms which were operational before that date.
67. And as the case of the applicants does not fall in that category, (their promotion or appointment not being between the year 27.11.2012 to 18.11.2019) hence, the crucial judgment of N.R. Parmar supra by the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 27.11.2012 which could only be prospectively implemented from that date has no relevance in the case of the applicants. And hence 2014 O.M has no relevance in the case of the applicants. So the clarification given by the DoP&T in Annexure R-13 dated 21.12.2017 was patently erroneous and is liable to be set aside.
68. Hence, in our considered opinion, there is no other option for the respondents, but to prepare the de-novo seniority of the direct recruits and promotees who were appointed and who joined the cadre before 27.11.2012, applying the earlier O.Ms dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 and 3.3.2008 and not by the O.M of 4.3.2014. SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 57 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
69. We have gone through the order in the cited co-ordinate bench (Patna) judgment in O.A No.406/2024 dated 07/08/2025 and we agree that the subject matter of the said O.A is one and the same and we fully agree with the final conclusions and orders in the said case.
70. Based on the above discussions, our findings on the issues framed are the following:
1. Our answer to the first question: If for the years 2003 to 2009 those who were selected by SSC (direct recruits) and joined during that period, and those who were promoted by LDCE during the said period, their de-novo inter-se seniority even if has to be prepared in 2017 or 2019 or even today also has to be based on the principles governing inter-se seniority prevailing at the time of their respective selection/joining/promotion and not on the principles governing seniority on the date of preparation of the de-novo seniority list.
2. For the question 2, our considered opinion is that DoP&T advise at Annexure R-13 dated 21.12.2017 is not correct and is liable to be set aside.
71. Accordingly, we pass the following orders:
SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 58 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE The Original Application is allowed by quashing the note of the DoP&T at Annexure R-13 (21.12.2017) in File No.7-1/2015-SPB II (Pt) of Dept. of Posts Dy.No.1272774/JS(E)/2017 and consequently the seniority lists appended to the (i) Order No.130975/2020/SPN-II-
DoP dated 24.07.2020, Annexure A6; (ii) Order No.STA/1- 21/AIGL/IP/III dated at Bengaluru-560001 dated 06.05.2022, Annexure A7; (iii) Order No.X-07/11/2019-SPN-II dated 20.06.2022 Annexure A8; (iv) Order No.X-07/14/2019-SPN-II dated 22.11.2019, Annexure-A9; and (v) Order No.X-07/21/2019-
SPN-11 dated 23.01.2020, Annexure A10; and the Order No.9- 10/2022-SPG-II dated 04.10.2022, Annexure-A21 issued by the respondent No.1, are all also set aside, along with any and all subsequent action (like promotion etc.) taken pursuant to the above.
The respondents are directed to re-fix the seniority of the applicants and other promotees and direct recruits of the year 2003-09 who were promoted or who joined as direct recruits before 27.11.2012 (i.e., the date of the judgment of N.R Parmar) strictly as per the DoPT Office Memorandums dated 7.2.1986, 3.7.1986 and 3.3.2008. The respondents are further directed that based on the new seniority list so prepared, further promotions may be initiated. SHAIN SHAINEY CAT VIJU EY Bangalore 2025.09.26 12:20:28 VIJU +05'30' 59 O.A.Nos.170/00008/2023/CAT/BANGALORE If any promotions are already effected consequent to the earlier orders/seniority lists being set aside, they shall be reverted to their previous positions and, as per the new seniority list only any fresh promotions in the cadre may be initiated.
This order shall be implemented expeditiously, and in no case later than two months from the receipt of the certified copy of the order of this Tribunal. All associated M.As, if any pending, are disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Sd/- Sd/-
(DR. SANJIV KUMAR) (JUSTICE B.K.SHRIVASTAVA)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
/SV/
SHAIN SHAINEY
CAT
VIJU
EY Bangalore
2025.09.26
12:20:28
VIJU +05'30'