Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Deepak Kr Xaxa vs Police on 8 August, 2025
1 OA. 351/00833/2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA
(CIRCUIT SITTING AT PORT BLAIR)
No. O.A. 351/00833/2023 Heard on: 15.07.2025
Date of Order: 08.08.2025
Present: Hon'ble Ms. Urmita Datta (Sen), Judicial Member
Hon'ble Mr. Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member
1. Shri Deepak Kumar Xaxa
2. Shri Devanand Pathak
3. Shri Abhishekh Menon
4. Shri Somen Kumar Halder
5. Shri Shaji Mathew
6. Shri Mohan Rao
7. Shri Ashok Kumar Bhagel
8. Shri Gaurav Banerjee
9. Shri M.V. Shiju Kumar
10. Shri Dinesh Meena
11. Shri K.P. Abdul Aziz
12. Shri P.C. Manickam
13. Shri Shri P.R. Shain
14. Shri Subramani
15. Shri Shibendra Nath Halder
16. Shri Vinit Kumar Maurya
17. Shri P. Jeevan
18. Shri J. Rama Krishna
19. Shri P.R. Pradeep Kumar
20. Shri Parvesh
21. Shri Manoj Lal
22. Shri S.S.M. Anish Ibrahim
23. Shri Randhir Singh
24. Shri Sudeep Kumar Goldar
25. Shri R. Dhiraj Kishen
.........Applicants
-Versus-
1. Union of India,
Service through the Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Jaisalmer House,
26, Man Singh Road,
New Delhi - 110 011.
2. The Lieutenant Governor,
Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65=
Shantanu
133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone=
495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414
3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223,
S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER=
1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4
812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu
Pramanik Pramanik
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
2 OA. 351/00833/2023
Andaman and Nicobar Islands,
Raj Niwas,
Port Blair.
3. Andaman & Nicobar Administration,
Secretariat,
Port Blair,
Through the Chief Secretary,
A&N Administration,
Port Blair - 744 101.
4. The Chief Secretary,
Andaman and Nicobar Administration
Secretariat,
Port Blair - 744 101.
5. The Director General of Police,
Andaman & Nicobar Islands,
Police Head Quarters,
Port Blair - 744 101.
............Respondents
6. Shri Ramalingam
7. Shri Abdul Manaf
8. Shri Pankaj Pandey
9. Shri S. Vishwanand
10. Shri P.M. Krishna Kumar
11. Shri G. Suresh Kumar
12. Shri M. Saravana
13. Shri Abdul Rehman
14. Shri V.P. Mishra
15. Shri P. Raja Rao
16. Shri B. Sasi Kumar
17. Shri Thiru Selvam
18. Shri V. Shiva Kumar
19. Shri Sunil Kumar Singh
20. Shri S. Raja Rao
21. Shri Mohd. Rafique
22. Shri P. Moideen Kutty
23. Shri C. Manivannan
24. Shri T. Dilli Rao
25. Shri Krishna Rao
... Private Respondents
For the Applicant : Mr. T.D. Cruz, Counsel
For the Respondents : Dr. D. Chowdhury, Counsel
Ms. A. Nag, Counsel
Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65=
Shantanu
133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone=
495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414
3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223,
S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER=
1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4
812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu
Pramanik Pramanik
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0
3 OA. 351/00833/2023
ORDER
Ms. Urmita Datta (Sen), Judicial Member:
The applicants have filed the instant Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following relief:-
"A) An order be passed quashing the impugned confirmed seniority list of Sub Inspector (Executive) of A&N Police being F. No. DGP/Estt./Seniority-SI/2016-17/3467 dated 11.07.2019 (Annexure -A-11) and Memo dated 05.01.2023 (Annexure A-14) being contrary to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of N.R. Parmar and DOPT O.M. dated 04.03.2014.
B) An order be passed directing the respondent No. 5 to recast the seniority list afresh by placing the applicant No. 1 Shri Deepak Kumar Xaxa above Shri Abdul Manaf and so on, on the basis of principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in N.R. Parmar case and DoPT OM dated 04.03.2014 without any further delay.
C) Any such order or orders be passed and or directing or directions be given as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.
D) Cost and incidentals to this application."
2. The admitted facts that arise from pleadings are as under:-
The applicants herein are all working as directly recruited Sub Inspector (Executive) in the Andaman & Nicobar Police Force. Initially, the Director General of Police constituted a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for considering the names of Assistant Sub Inspectors (Executive) for the post of Sub Inspector (Executive) against the vacancies of recruitment year 2010. The DPC meeting was held on 28.09.2010. In the minutes of the DPC meeting, it was clearly mentioned that as per the approval of the Director General of Police, 40 posts were to be filled up by way of Direct Recruitment Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 4 OA. 351/00833/2023 and the remaining posts were to be filled up by promotion. Finally, the DPC recommended the names of 27 senior most Assistant Sub Inspectors to be considered for the post of Sub Inspectors on adhoc basis since none of the candidates fulfilled the eligibility criteria of possessing minimum six years qualifying service and the issue of relaxation was decided to be taken up with the Administration for seeking approval of the competent authority.
Among the Assistant Sub Inspectors (Executive), whose names were considered by the DPC, the senior most of them led by Shri Abdul Manaf & ors. moved this Tribunal challenging the proposal of direct recruitment to the post of Sub-Inspector (Executive) and fixing the minimum qualifying service of six years for promotion from the cadre of Assistant Sub Inspector (Executive). In the meantime, 17 Assistant Sub-Inspectors (Executive) were promoted to the post of Sub Inspector (Executive) purely on adhoc basis that they will not have any claim or right to seniority in the rank of Sub Inspector. The legal battle initiated by Shri Abdul Manaf & ors. went up to the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta, Circuit Bench at Port Blair wherein vide common judgment dated 15.07.2013, in the matter of Shri K.A. Karthikeyan v. Union of India & ors. in WP No. 44 of 2013 and Shri Abdul Manaf & ors. v. Union of India & ors. in WP No. 127 of 2013, the Hon'ble High Court held that all the vacancies of recruitment year 2010 are prior to framing of recruitment rules and thus the posts of Sub Inspector (Executive) are to be filled in the ratio of 50% by promotion and 50% by direct recruitment by holding that the approval was granted by the Chief Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 5 OA. 351/00833/2023 Commissioner, the Administrator of Union Territory for the same in the year 1971. In view of such common judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court, the final result of direct recruitment for the post of Sub Inspector (Executive) in A&N Police was declared on 12.10.2013. The names of the present applicants appeared in the final list of selected candidates. Thereafter, vide Order dated 13.11.2013, another set of Assistant Sub Inspectors (Executive) were promoted to the post of Sub Inspector (Executive) on officiating basis. The applicants were issued appointment Order vide Order Book No. 3871 dated 31.05.2014 on regular basis. The applicants submits that while issuing the provisional seniority list dated 23.12.2016, the respondents have not followed the instructions contained in DOPT O.M. dated 04.03.2014 issued in pursuance to the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N.R. Parmar v. UOI & ors. reported in (2012) 13 SCC 340. Being aggrieved, the applicants submitted a representation requesting the authorities to reexamine the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotions in the provisional seniority list of Sub-Inspector, which was rejected vide Memo dated 10.07.2019 citing DoP&T O.M. dated 03.03.2008, which is in gross violation of the DoP&T O.M. dated 04.03.2014, which mandates to treat the O.M. dated 03.03.2008 to be non-existent/withdrawn ab initio. The applicants submitted another representation for reviewing or recalling the final seniority list dated 11.07.2019, which was also rejected by the authorities vide Memo dated 05.02.2023 citing DoP&T OM dated 13.08.2021, Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 6 OA. 351/00833/2023 which was also in total violation of the judgment passed in N.R. Parmar (supra). Hence this O.A.
3. The official respondents have filed their reply and have contended that 67 posts of Sub Inspector (Executive), which were lying vacant as on 28.09.2010 were required to be filled up in terms of draft Recruitment Rules (RR), 2010 and as per the said RR, 50% vacancies of Sub Inspector (Executive) were required to be filled up by way of direct recruitment and the remaining 50% vacancies were to be filled up by way of promotion from amongst the eligible ASI (Executive), who possess 06 years of regular service in the feeder grade. Accordingly, a total of 40 vacancies of Sub Inspector (Executive) including 13 back log vacancies were kept for Direct Recruitment and the remaining 27 vacancies were to be filled up by way of promotion. The DPC in its meeting held on 28.09.2010 considered the names of ASI (Executive) for promotion to the rank of Sub Inspector (Executive). In the meanwhile, the draft RRs of 2010 for Sub Inspector (Executive) was approved and notified on 03.01.2011 and in terms of the said RR, 50% posts of Sub Inspector (Executive) were to be filled amongst the eligible ASI (Executive), who possess 06 years of regular service in the feeder grade and the remaining 50% posts were to be filled by way of direct recruitment, which was later amended and 70% posts of SI (Executive) were decided to be filled by way of direct recruitment and 30% posts were to be filled up by way of promotion and accordingly the amended Recruitment Rules were notified on 29.08.2011. In the meantime, due to non-availability of eligible ASI (Executive) for promotion to Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 7 OA. 351/00833/2023 the rank of Sub Inspector (Executive) possessing the minimum requisite qualifying service, it was decided to seek relaxation regarding the minimum qualifying service and a note containing a proposal for relaxation was sent to A&N Administration on 06.03.2012, which was subsequently approved by the competent authority for considering promotion on adhoc basis to 19 ASI (Executive) to the post of SI (Executive) with further direction to regularize their service upon fulfilling the requisite eligibility criteria as per Recruitment Rules notified on 29.08.2011. In the meantime, on the basis of notified Recruitment Rules dated 29.09.2011, a total number of 56 posts were notified and published in the local newspaper. However, challenging the said Notification, an O.A. No. 32/AN/2012 was filed before this Tribunal for filling up all the vacancies of Sub Inspector (Executive), which arose prior to 03.01.2011 in terms of provisions of A&N Police Manual, 1963.
Subsequently, another O.A. No. 45/AN/2012 was also filed with similar prayer. In the meanwhile, 17 ASI (Executive) were promoted on 11.06.2012 vide Order Book No. 6028 dated 11.06.2012. Both these were dismissed by this Tribunal and the matters travelled upto the Hon'ble High Court and vide Order dated 15.07.2023, the Hon'ble High Court observed as under:-
"Till the recruitment rules for recruitment of Sub Insepctor of Police (Exe.) came into force, the posts of Sub Inspector of Police (Executive) are to be filled in 50% per centum by promotion and 50% per centum by direct recruitment, but imposition of the condition of six years regular service in the feeder grade could not be imposed in the absence of any provisions in the Police Manual in as much as the Recruitment Rules of 2010 came into operation only in January 2011. Subsequently however, Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 8 OA. 351/00833/2023 the Recruitment Rules of 2010 were replaced by the Recruitment Rules of 2011 w.e.f. August, 2011.
Thus, we hold, in modification of the orders of this Tribunal, that imposition of the conditions of six years regular service in the feeder grade by the departmental promotion committee was without jurisdiction.
Therefore, the orders impugned stand modified. The recommendations of the departmental promotion committee ignoring the candidature of these petitioners, on the ground not having six years regular service in the grade, is set aside.
Fortunately, the administration has given only ad hoc promotions to 17 persons out of 27 persons who have been selected by the departmental promotion committee. Therefore, no right has, yet, been accrued to persons, who have been promoted on adhoc basis.
The administration is, therefore, directed to take steps for filling up the posts of Sub Inspector (Executive), in accordance with law expeditiously." Thereafter another set of 18 ASIs were promoted to the rank of Sub Inspector (Executive) w.e.f. 19.11.2013 and 17 Sub Inspectors were also regularized w.e.f. 11.06.2012 vide Order Book No. 13024 dated 19.11.2013 (Annexure A-5). The list of selected candidates was published on 12.10.2013 (Annexure A-4) decreasing the vacancy from 56 to 45 and the selected candidates were given appointment in the year 2014. Subsequently, on 23.12.2016 (Annexure A/7), a provisional seniority list of Sub Inspector (Executive) was issued inviting objections from the incumbents within a period of 30 days. However, the applicants did not submit any representation in response to the said Memorandum. The applicants submitted their representation against seniority list on 16.04.2019 (Annexure A-9) with a request to consider their inter se seniority in terms of DoP&T O.M. dated 03.03.2008. Their representations were considered and finally rejected vide Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 9 OA. 351/00833/2023 Memorandum dated 10.07.2019. The provisional seniority list was confirmed on 11.07.2019 (Annexure A/11). Being aggrieved with, the applicants preferred representation dated 21.10.2022 against the said seniority list citing DoP&T O.M. dated 04.03.2014, which was rejected vide O.M. dated 13.08.2021 pursuant to judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 8833-
35/2019 - (K. Megachandra Singh & ors. v. Ningam Siro & ors.) and the applicants were duly communicated about the rejection of their prayer vide O.M. dated 05.01.2023. Now the applicants have come up before this Tribunal challenging the seniority list dated 11.07.2019 along with Memo dated 05.01.2023. The respondents have also relied upon a judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Jagdish Ch. Patnaik v. State of Orissa reported in 1998 (4) SCC 456.
4. The applicants have filed their rejoinder mainly reiterating the facts stated in the O.A.
5. The private respondents have filed their reply and written notes of arguments wherein they have stated that they were promoted to the post of Sub Inspector after participating in the selection process by the authorities. All the private respondents were promoted on the basis of the recommendation of the respondent authorities. It is for that reasons that the authorities regularized the promotion of 16 Sub Inspectors vide Order dated 14.08.2015 w.e.f. 11.06.2012. Similarly, the promotion of 18 Sub Inspectors vide Order dated 19.11.2013 is based upon the recommendation of the Department Promotion Committee held on Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 10 OA. 351/00833/2023 12.11.2013. Hence, seniority has to be determined on the basis of date of appointments. The word "officiating basis" is a misnomer as the private respondents who were promoted on 19.11.2013 were promoted after participating in the selection process and on the recommendation of the Department Promotion Committee. They have further stated that this Original Application is grossly barred by limitation since the applicants have challenged the provisional seniority list after a lapse of almost three years. Provisional Seniority list was published on 23.12.2016 and representation was submitted on 16.04.2019. The said representation was rejected on 10.07.2019 and final seniority list was published on 11.07.2019.
The applicant submitted an application for reviewing and recalling of the seniority list dated 11.07.2019 on 22.10.2022 i.e., after a period of more than two years. The said representation was rejected on 05.01.2023. In order to make the Original Application maintainable, the applicant filed recall application on 22.10.2022 whereas his representation was rejected on 10.07.2019 and final seniority list was published on 11.07.2019. The instant Petition is challenging the final seniority list of 11.07.2019 in 2023 i.e., after a period of more than four years. They have not filed any application for condonation of delay. Hence, the Original Application is liable to be dismissed.
Secondly, the Order dated 14.08.2015, whereby 16 Sub Inspectors (Private Respondents) were promoted to the post of Sub Inspectors w.e.f. 11.06.2012, has not been challenged in the Original Application. Their date of appointment remains 11.06.2012 Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 11 OA. 351/00833/2023 which is much before the date of appointment of the applicants i.e. 31.05.2014. Even the second promotion Order dated 19.11.2013 has not been challenged.
6. We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the respective parties and have perused the materials available on record.
7. It is noted that the applicants have basically challenged the final seniority list dated 11.07.2019 of Sub-Inspector (Executive) of Andaman & Nicobar Police as well as Memo dated 05.01.2023 which according to the applicant is contrary to the Order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of N.R. Parmar and DoP&T O.M. dated 04.03.2014.
8. It is noted that though the applicant had challenged seniority list of Sub Inspectors (Executive) of A&N Police dated 11.07.2019 and Memo dated 05.01.2023 and this Tribunal had disposed of the O.A. on 21.02.2024 by quashing the provisional seniority list dated 21.03.2024 by quashing the provisional seniority list dated 23.11.2016 and impugned final seniority list dated 11.07.2019.
9. In order to consider the claim of the applicants, let us consider the chronological admitted facts of the case, which are as follows:-
(i) The DPC meeting held on 28.09.2010 had considered the names of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Executive) for promotion as Sub-Inspector in the Executive Branch of Andaman & Nicobar Police Administration on the basis of the draft Recruitment Rules of 2010.Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 12 OA. 351/00833/2023
(ii) The Draft Recruitment Rules was notified on 03.01.2011.
(iii) On 29.08.2011 the Recruitment Rule was amended.
(iv) On recommendation of the DPC held on 11.06.2012, 17 Assistant Sub-Inspectors were promoted to the rank of Sub-
Inspector (Executive) on adhoc basis against the initial vacancies.
(v) Initially 28 persons were promoted on adhoc basis and relaxation was called for from the competent authority since as per the minutes of the DPC, they did not fulfil the eligibility criteria of six years qualifying service.
(vi) In the meantime, the administration issued an advertisement to fill up 56 posts of Sub Inspector by Direct Recruitment. By challenging the same and also promotion of the concerned ASIs on adhoc basis, the draft Recruitment Rules of 2010 was challenged before this Tribunal and ultimately two Writ Petitions being No. WPCT No. 44/2013 (Shri K.A. Karthikeyan v. Union of India & ors.) and WPCT No. 127 of 2013 (Shri Abdul Manaf & ors. v. The Union of India & ors.) which was decided by judgment dated 15.07.2013 wherein the following was held:-
"A. Whether the Administration, before the promulgation of the recruitment rules, that is, the Andaman and Nicobar Administration (Police Department ) Group 'B' (Non-Gazetted) posts Recruitment Rules, 2010, could recruit Sub-Inspectors by way of direct recruitment, and, B. Whether the Administration was right in imposing condition of working experience of five years or six years for consideration for promotion from the feeder post of Assistant Sub-Inspectors to the post of Sub-Inspectors." Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 13 OA. 351/00833/2023 Therefore till the recruitment rules for recruitment of Sub-
Inspector of Police (Executive) came into force, the posts of Sub Inspector of Police (Executive) are to be filled in 50% per centum by promotion and 50% per centum by direct recruitment, but imposition of condition of six years regular service in the feeder grade could not be imposed in the absence of any provisions in the Police Manual inasmuch as the Recruitment Rules of 2010 came into operation only in January, 2011. Subsequently, however, the Recruitment Rules of 2010 were replaced by the Recruitment Rules of 2011 with effect from August, 2011.
Thus, we hold, in modification of the orders of the Tribunal, that imposition of the condition of six years regular service in the feeder grade by the departmental promotion committee was without jurisdiction.
Therefore, the orders impugned stand modified. The recommendations of the departmental promotion committee ignoring the candidature of these petitioners, on the ground of not having six years of regular service in the grade, is set aside.
Fortunately, the Administration has given only ad hoc promotions to 17 persons out of 27 persons, who have been selected by the departmental promotion committee. Therefore, no right has, yet, been accrued to the persons, who have been promoted on ad hoc basis.
The Administration is, therefore, directed to take steps for filling up the posts of Sub-Inspectors (Executive), in accordance with law expeditiously.
The writ petitions are, thus, disposed of."
When these two issues were considered by the Hon'ble High Court with regard to 'A', it has been held that:-
" xxxxxxxxx Thus we hold that the proposal of the police department to recruit at least 50% per centum of Sub-Inspectors by direct recruitment was approved by the Administration and the approval was not only for the year 1971.
Xxxxxxxxx Fortunately, the Administration has given only ad hoc promotions to 17 persons out of 27 persons, who have been selected by the departmental promotional committee. Therefore, no right has, yet, been accrued to the persons, who have been promoted on adhoc basis."
The judgment dated 15.07.2013 passed in the aforesaid two Writ Petitions, the final result of direct recruitment was published changing the vacancy position from 56 to 45 wherein the name of the applicants figured in the final result list dated 12.10.2013.
Digitally signed by Shantanu PramanikDN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 14 OA. 351/00833/2023
(vii) On 19.11.2013, another set of 18 ASI was promoted to the rank of Sub-Inspector (Executive) on officiating basis on the basis of recommendation of the DPC held on 12.11.2013 under Order Book No. 13024 (Annexure A-5) and subsequently vide Order dated 31.05.2014 under Order Book No. 3871 (Annexure A-60 the applicants were appointed as Sub-Inspector (Executive) against the existing vacancy w.e.f.
18.05.2014 as a Direct Recruit (Annexure A-6).
(viii) In consonance with Hon'ble High Court's Order dated 15.07.2013, on 14.08.2015, (Annexure R-4 of reply of the added Respondent No. 6 to 25), vide Order Book No. 6262, adhoc promotion of following Sub-Inspectors were issued and they were regularized with effect from the date noted against each.
" OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE Andaman & Nicobar Islands ORDER BOOK NO. 6262 In partial modification of this Office Order Book No. 9707 dt. 08.07.2013, 3108 dt. 14.05.2013, 8290 dt. 22/11/2014, the adhoc promotion of following Sub-Inspectors issued vide Order Book No. 6028 dated 14th June, 2012 are hereby regularized with effect from the date noted against each.
Sl. No. Rank Name Date of
Regularization
1. Sub-Inspector Abdul Manaf 11.06.2012
2. Sub-Inspector P.K. Pandey 11.06.2012
3. Sub-Inspector Vishwanand 11.06.2012
4. Sub-Inspector P.M. Krishna Kumar 11.06.2012
5. Sub-Inspector R.D. Ram 11.06.2012
6. Sub-Inspector G. Suresh Kumar 11.06.2012
7. Sub-Inspector M. Saravana 11.06.2012
Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 15 OA. 351/00833/2023
8. Sub-Inspector Nizamuddin Khan 11.06.2012
9. Sub-Inspector Abdul Rehman 11.06.2012
10. Sub-Inspector V. Siva Kumar 11.06.2012
11. Sub-Inspector Mani Ram Yadav 11.06.2012
12. Sub-Inspector V.P. Mishra 11.06.2012
13. Sub-Inspector Bishram Singh 11.06.2012
14. Sub-Inspector M.T. Abdul Salam 11.06.2012
15. Sub-Inspector P. Raja Rao 11.06.2012
16. Sub-Inspector S.S. Yadav This issues with the approval of the Director General of Police, Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
Sd/-
(Alok Kumar, DANIPS) Dy. Superintendent of Police (Estt.) Police Head Quarter"
(ix) Subsequently, the provisional seniority list of Sub-
Inspector (Executive) of Andaman & Nicobar Police as on 16.12.2016 was published vide Memorandum dated 23.12.2016 (Annexure A-7) wherein the names of the private respondents were reflected from Srl. No. 54 to 65 and the date of regularization has been mentioned as 11.06.2012 and with regard to private respondent No. 67, 68 to 70 and 72, 76, 81, 83 was reflected against Srl. Nos. 06 to 25, whose date of regularization had been mentioned as 19.11.2012 respectively whereas the names of the applicants in this O.A. appear at Srl.
No. 95-98, 100-109 and 111-113 and against their names, the date of appointment was mentioned as 18.05.2014 against which 12 applicants made representation against the provisional seniority list dated 23.12.2016 on 16.04.2019 and their representations were considered and rejected in view of Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 16 OA. 351/00833/2023 DoP&T O.M. dated 03.03.2008 on the ground that the criteria of fixation of seniority would be the actual year of appointment vide Office Memo dated 10.07.2019 (Annexure A-10). However, the said Order was not challenged by the applicants and thereafter, a final/confirmed seniority list of Sub-Inspector (Executive) of Andaman & Nicobar Police after considering the objection and taking action on the same, the list was published on 11.07.2019, wherein also the names of the private respondents were put above the applicants on the basis of the provisional seniority list as well as their date of regularization vis-à-vis the date of appointment of the applicants. Against the provisional seniority list published on 23.12.2016, representation was filed on 16.04.2019, however, the representations of the applicants were rejected on 10.07.2019. Again Shri Saiji Mathew filed a representation review and recalling of the seniority list dated 11.07.2019 on 21.10.2022 (Annexure A-13), which was rejected vide Memo dated 05.01.2023 (Annexure A-14), which is reproduced below:-
" A-23018/2/2022-Estt-PHQ-POLICE_AN OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE Andaman & Nicobar Islands Port Blair dated 05 January, 2023 Memo With reference to the representations submitted by the following Sub Inspectors for review and recall the Confirmed Seniority List of SI (Exe) issued vide No.DGP/Estt/SI-Seniority/2016-17/3467 dated 11/07/2019, they are hereby informed that their request has been carefully examined but could not be acceded to in view of DOPT OM No.20011/2/2019-Estt. (D) dated 13th August, 2021 and rejected as the cases of seniority already settled with reference to the applicable Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 17 OA. 351/00833/2023 Interpretation of the term availability in DoPT OM dated 07/02/1986 and 03/07/1986.
Sd/-
Dy. Superintendent of Police (Estt) For Director General of Police (1/C) Police Head Quarters"
(x) Being aggrieved with, the applicant has filed this instant O.A. which was initially disposed of vide Order dated 21.02.2024 holding inter alia:-
" xxxxxxx
20. In view of the above discussion, it is held that the respondents are in error in determining the inter-se seniority of the applicants' vis. a vis.
the promotees on the basis of date of appointment instead of with reference to the recruitment year. Provisional seniority list dated 23.11.2016 and the impugned final seniority list dated 11.07.2019 are accordingly quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to recast the inter-se seniority of the applicants and the promotee Sis in accordance with the provisions of the DoPT O.M. dated 04.03.2014 within a period of 4 months from the date of this order."
(xi) Being aggrieved with, the private respondents preferred one WPCT No. 17/2024 challenging the Order of 21.02.2024 passed in O.A. No. 833 of 2023 which, was disposed of vide judgment dated 11.03.2024 in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jagdish Ch. Patnaik v. State of Orissa, AIR 1998 SC 1926 and also in terms of the Para 2.21 of the Police Manual, the seniority of the petitioners/added respondents are to be counted from the date of their permanent appointment/regularization which is much prior to the date of permanent appointment of the applicants/respondents. On the basis of referring to the reported judgment passed in WPCT No. 413/2015 (Shri Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 18 OA. 351/00833/2023 Jeeshan Iman & ors. v. The Union of India & ors.), whereby the following Order was passed:
"Heard Ms. Anjili Nag, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Terrence D'Cruz, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 25 and Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi, learned counsel for the respondent nos.27 to 30.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners praying to quash the order dated 21.02.2024 in O.A. no. 351/00833/2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata (Circuit at Port Blair), whereby the Tribunal held that the inter se seniority of direct recruitees and promotees should have been determined in accordance with the provisions of O.M. dated 04.03.2014 and held that the respondents are in error in determining the inter se seniority of the applicants vis.a.vis the promotees on the basis of the date of appointment instead of with reference to the recruitment year. Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed the provisional seniority list dated 23.11.2016 and directed the respondents to recast the seniority list of the applicants and promotees, Sub-Inspectors in accordance with the DOPT O.M. dated 04.03.2014 within a period of four months from the date of the order.
The petitioners herein were not party to the aforesaid O.A. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are the promotees, SIs and their services were regularized in the year 2012 and 2013 as stated in the paragraph 7 and 8 of the affidavit accompanying the writ petition. Therefore, submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that in terms of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jagdish Ch. Patnaik - versus State of Orissa, AIR 1998 SC 1926 and also in terms of the para 2.21 of the Police Manual, the seniority of the petitioners are to be counted from the date of their permanent appointment/regularization which is much prior to the date of permanent appointment of the respondents, who were applicants in the aforesaid O.A., i.e. 13.5.2014. Therefore, it is submitted that since valuable rights of the petitioners are affected by the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, which has been passed without hearing them and consequently, the writ petition is maintainable. In support of her submission learned Counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in January 2016 in WPCT/413/2015 (Shri Jeeshan Iman and Others - versus The Union of India and Others). She also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others -v - Kareem and Others, 1991 (Sup2) SCC 183.
On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered on 25.07.1997 in K. Ajith Babu and Others versus Union of India AIR 1997 SC 3277, wherein the controversy with regard to the preliminary objection was as to whether for the purpose of review, a person can be said to be person aggrieved within the meaning of Section 22 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.
We find that the preliminary objection raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents in the present writ petition is not sustainable in view of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Shri Jeeshan Iman (Supra) and later the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Judgment of M. A. Kareem (Supra) the petitioners are certainly persons aggrieved inasmuch as the impugned Judgment was passed by the Tribunal without getting impleaded the petitioners herein or without affording any opportunity of hearing to them while at the same time the Tribunal decided the question of seniority of promotees and direct recruitees. Under the circumstances, the preliminary objection as raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents is hereby rejected.
After the argument of the learned Counsel for the parties were heard at length. Both the learned Counsel for the respondents jointly submit that the impugned order may be set aside and the O.A. in question be restored to its original number and the Tribunal may decide the O.A afresh in accordance with law within a time bound period after hearing the petitioners herein. Learned Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 19 OA. 351/00833/2023 Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 25 herein submits that till the decision of the aforesaid O.A., the earlier seniority list may not be given affect by the authorities. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has no objection to the aforesaid submissions.
In view of the aforesaid and on agreement between learned counsel for the parties, we disposed of the writ petition by setting aside the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 in O.A. No. 351/00833/2023 (Shri Deepak Kumar Xaxa and 24 others -versus-Union of India and four others) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata (Circuit at Port Blair), the aforesaid O.A. is restored to its original number and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal with the following directions:
i. The petitioners herein are allowed to be impleaded 115 in the respondents aforesaid O.Α. 351/00833/2023 Impleadment shall be carried out in the aforesaid O.A. 351/00833/2023 within two weeks from today.
ii. All the petitioners herein shall appear before the Tribunal in the aforesaid O.A. within two weeks from today along with certified copy of this order.
iii. The petitioners herein shall submit their objections to the aforesaid O.A. within next two weeks.
iv. The respondents nos. 1 to 25 herein shall submit their reply to the aforesaid objection of the petitioners within next two weeks. The respondent nos. 26 to 30 may also file their objections before the Tribunal within the same period, if they so desire.
v. The Tribunal shall decide the aforesaid O.A. within next one month, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to all the parties to the said O.A. vi. The respondent nos. 1 to 25 herein shall also serve a copy of the aforesaid O.A. upon the petitioners herein within weeks from today.
vii. The seniority list which has been quashed by the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 in O.Α. 351/00833/2023 shall remain subject to the decision of the Tribunal.
It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merit of the case of the parties.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of."
(xii) In the meanwhile, three applicants, namely, S/Shri Poojan Prasad, Silvester Tete and Sawlase Xess filed O.A. No. 1162/2019 praying for the same relief, wherein the following prayers, which are same and identical to the present petition were made:
"(A). An order be passed quashing the impugned confirmed seniority list of Sub Inspectors (Executive) of A&N Police being F. No. DGP/Estt./Seniority-SI/2016-17/3467 dated 11.7.2019 being contrary to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in N.R. Parmar Case and DOPT O.M. dated 4.3.2014. Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 20 OA. 351/00833/2023 (B) An order be passed directing the respondent No. 5 to recast the seniority list afresh on the basis of principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in N.R. Parmar Case and DoPT O.M. dated 4.3.2014 as referred to above without any further delay.
(C) Any such order or orders be passed and or direction or directions be given as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.
(D) Cost and incidental to this application."
which was disposed of vide Order dated 19.04.2023, holding inter alia:
"7.4. DoPT issued revised instructions on the subject of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees vide O.M. No. 2011/1/2012- Estt.(D) dated 4.3.2014 in pursuance of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court on 27.11.2012 in Civil Appeal No. 7514-7515/2005 in the case of N.R. Parmar v. Union of India. The instructions read as under:-
"(a) DoPT O.M. 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 O.M. dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986, 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 recruits; I 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 v. UOI & ors.
(i) The cases of seniority already settled with reference to the applicable interpretation of the team availability, as contained in DoPT O.M. dated 7.2.86/3.7.86 may not be reopened."
Digitally signed by Shantanu PramanikDN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 21 OA. 351/00833/2023 7.5. DoPT vide O.M. No. 20011/2/2019-Estt. (D) dated 13.8.2021 issued revised instructions on the subject matter in pursuance of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 8833-8835 of 2019 K. Meghachandra Singh & ors. vs. Ningam Siro & ors. wherein the law laid down in N.R. Parmar case relating to determination of inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees in a grade/post was again reviewed and in its order dated 19.11.2019, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has overruled the decision of Courts in N.R. Parmar's case.
8. In the instant case, 17 direct recruits to the post of Sub-Inspector (Exe.) were appointed in the year 2009 on various dates w.e.f. 5.2.2009 to 13.2.2009. On the other hand, the applicants were regularized as Sub- Inspector (Exe.) on 25.6.2009, 30.4.2009 and 24.6.2009 respectively.
9. On the date when 17 new posts of Sub-Inspector were created i.e. on 25.8.2008 none of the applicants were eligible for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector (Exe.) as they were still serving as Assistant Sub-
Inspector (Exe.) on adhoc basis. As noted earlier, their adhoc services were regularized only much later i.e. on 25.6.2009, 30.4.2009 and 24.6.2009 respectively.
10. The applicants were appointed on a regular basis against vacancies available in the year 2009 whereas the direct recruits were appointed against vacancies available during the year 2008. The Direct Recruits were accordingly placed higher in the final seniority list for Sub-Inspector (Exe.) in Andaman & Nicobar Police vis-à-vis the applicants (the promotees). There is therefore no infirmity in the seniority list issued vide Memo No. DGP/Estt./SI-Seniority/2016-17/3467 dated 11th July 2019.
11. In view of the foregoing, this O.A. lacks merit and is, therefore, dismissed."
(xiii) The aforesaid Order was challenged by the applicants of that O.A., in WPCT No. 40/2023 before the Hon'ble High Court, which was disposed of vide judgment dated 29.09.2023 holding inter alia:
" ................................
33. In the instant case, it is a specific stand of the authorities that while fixing the seniority among the direct recruit and the promotees the ratio of 1:1 as held by N.R. Parmar is not applicable and hence not been insisted upon. Neither there is any alteration of the decision taken on the basis of N.R. Parmar by virtue of a subsequent decision rendered in K. Megachandra. The authorities have adopted the recourse in putting the person in the seniority list on the basis of the date of appointment and such conscious decision having taken on the basis of the vacancy having arisen which cannot be said to be infirmed. Thus, we do not find any merit in the instant writ petition.
34. The writ petition is thus dismissed. No order as to costs."
The applicants have also cited judgment passed in A. Janardhana v. Union of India & ors. reported in 1983 AIR 769 Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 22 OA. 351/00833/2023
(xiv) It is noted that as per the official respondents that the seniority of the applicants was already decided and affirmed in terms of O.M. dated 07.02.1986 and 13.02.1986 read with 03.03.2008 and their inter se seniority has been fixed from the date they were appointed i.e. in the year they were born in the cadre or formal appointment order was issued.
(xv) In the meantime, one Office Memorandum dated 13.08.2021 was issued by the DoP&T on the basis of Order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Meghachandra Singh & Nizam Siro & ors., wherein in Para 07, the following stipulation was 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 O.M. No. 20011/1/2012-Estt. (D) dated 4.3.2014, issued in pursuance of Order dated 27.11.2012 in N.R. Parmar case, is treated as non-
est/withdrawn w.e.f. 19.11.2019.
(ii) As the Order dated 19.11.2019 is prospective, cases of inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotees already decided in terms of OM 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 also be governed by the provisions of O.Ms. dated 7.2.1986/3.7.1986 read with OM dated 4.3.2014, unless where a different 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 Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 23 OA. 351/00833/2023 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 recruitment initiated on or after 19.11.2019 as well as for future recruitment. In addition to cases where the recruitment process has been initiated by the administrative Department/ Cadre Authority before 19.11.2019, but where all appointments, subsequent to the initiation of recruitment process, could be made only on or after 19.11.2019 i.e. date of order of Apex Court the inter se seniority of direct recruits and promotes shall be determined in the following manner -
(a) The rotation of quota based on the percentage of vacancies allocated to direct recruitment and promotion in the notified recruitment rules/service rules, shall continue to operate for determination of vacancies to be filled by the respective quotas in a recruitment year.
(b) Determination of inter-se seniority between direct recruits and promotees, who are appointed against the vacancies of respective quota, would, however, be reckoned with reference to the year in which they are appointed Le. year in which they are borne, in the cadre or formal appointment order is issued in case, where the recruitment year as 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 ie 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.
Digitally signed by Shantanu PramanikDN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 24 OA. 351/00833/2023
(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 to promotee is available in that year available direct recruits would be bunched together.as per their position obtained in the selection process.
(g) In case, where direct recruits or promotees, as the case may be, belonging to two inore 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."
10. Therefore, in our considered opinion since the private respondents were regularized w.e.f. 11.06.2012, 19.11.2012 and 18.05.2014 and the applicants were appointed on 31.05.2014 i.e. after the regularization of the private respondents. Even their representation dated 16.04.2019 against the provisional seniority list dated 23.12.2016 was rejected way back on 10.07.2019 and again they filed further representation on 22.10.2022 asking for review of the final seniority list dated 11.07.2019 i.e. after a gap of two years and rejection of their case on 10.07.2019, which was again rejected in the year 2023. Therefore, in view of the above, they are estopped to challenge the final seniority list at present that too after a long gap of time and therefore, subsequent representation on the same issue in 2022 cannot be a ground for condonation of delay in approaching this Tribunal.
11. In view of the above, as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court's Order, Orders of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta, in our considered opinion, the official respondents have rightly granted Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0 25 OA. 351/00833/2023 seniority of the applicants vis-à-vis private respondents as per their respective dates of regular promotion as well as dates of appointments of applicants.
12. Accordingly, the O.A. is dismissed being devoid of merit. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Suchitto Kumar Das) Urmita Datta (Sen)
Administrative Member Judicial Member
sp
Digitally signed by Shantanu Pramanik
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=6283, OID.2.5.4.65= Shantanu 133598026844054409pZp0Sk77DU2VN1, Phone= 495dab51bd16f95eab3873746237af9545f09bb414 3baf81a658d7fbc937c888, PostalCode=712223, S=West Bengal, SERIALNUMBER= 1d3af0fbe8dee56095510835a714afdf51d7f6d80c4 812359eaee8938da0637e, CN=Shantanu Pramanik Pramanik Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.12 12:13:32-07'00' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.3.0