Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Chetan Prakash Bhatt vs Revenue on 9 September, 2025
1
O.A. No.127/2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
O.A. No. 127/2023
M.A. No. 142/2023
M.A. No. 2027/2023
M.A. No. 2283/2025
Reserved on: 08.08.2025
Pronounced on: .08.2025
HON'BLE MR. B. ANAND, MEMBER (A)
HON'BLE SHRI AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER (J)
1. Chetan Prakash Bhatt, Working as Tax Assistant
(Group - 'C) DOB: 25.09.1972 S/o. Late Sh. K. N. Bhatt, R/o.
N-28A, Street No. 3, Vijay Vihar, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi -
110059 Date of Joining Department: 01.08.1997 Place of
current posting: Customs, ICD, TKD, Export, New Delhi
Seniority List (Serial No. 240)
2. Gurbachan Singh, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 01.01.1971 S/o. Late Sh. Jiwan Singh, R/o. G54A,
Nandram Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110 059 Date of
Joining Department: 06.11.1992 Place of current posting: A&G
NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 200)
3. Manjit Kumar Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB: 05.05.1987, S/o. Sh. Chattar Singh, R/o. RZ-18, X
Block, Ganpati Enclave Najafgarh, New Delhi Date of Joining
Department: 16.10.2008 Place of current posting: Customs
Preventive NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 289)
4. Suresh Kumar Dwivedi, Working as Tax Assistant
(Group - C) DOB: 30.06.1971 S/o. Sh. K. D. Dwivedi, R/o. B-4,
Subhash Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110059 Date of
Joining Department: December, 2000: Place of current posting:
Customs Audit NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 263)
5. Rajesh Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB:15.03.1973, S/o. Sh. Dharampal, R/o. 196, MC, Primary
School Road, VPO Khaira, Najafgarh, New Delhi - 110043 Date
of Joining Department: 29.03.1996: Place of current posting:
CGST Delhi West Seniority List (Serial No. 261)
2
O.A. No.127/2023
6. Ashok Kumar Meena, Working as Tax Assistant (Group
- C) DOB: 01.07.1983 S/o. Sh. Chhaju Lal Meena, R/o. Q No.
886, Sec-03, Pushp Vihar, Delhi - 110017 Date of Joining
Department: 24.01.2006 Place of current posting: Customs
Audit NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 270)
7. Jagmohan, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB:06.07.1972, S/o. Sh. Jagdish Chand, R/o. 517, Chirag
Dilli, New Delhi Date of Joining Department: 28.11.1997 Place
of current posting: CGST Delhi East Seniority List (Serial No.
236)
8. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Working as Tax Assistant (Group -
C) S/o. Late Sh. Jagdish Singh, R/o. K-318, Street No. 6/A,
Mahipal Pur, New Delhi - 110 037. Date of Joining
Department: 29.03.1996 Place of current posting: ICD TKD
Import Seniority List (Serial No. 268)
9. Deepak Kumar Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB:05.05.1987, S/o. Sh. Bedram, R/o. No. 61/8, Pushp
Vihar, Sector-1, Saket, New Delhi-110017. Date of Joining
Department: 16.10.2008 Place of current posting: Customs
Preventive NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 289)
10. Satyendra Singh Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 27.10.1978 S/o. Sh. Rajender Singh, R/o. H. No. 2074,
Sector-6, District Jhajjar, Haryana. Date of Joining
Department: 22.03.2018 Place of current posting: Customs
ACCI NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 313)
11. Rantej Singh, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB:01.06.1971, S/o. Sh. Puran Singh, R/o. MS-1113 Type-
2, Timarpur, Delhi- 110054, Date of Joining Department:
07.02.2003 Place of current posting: ICD PPG Seniority List
(Serial No. 275)
12. Umesh Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB: 04.01.1977 S/o. Sh. Rampran Shah, R/o. H. No.30/320,
Old 30 Block, Trilokpuri, Delhi - 110091 Date of Joining
Department: 27.01.2006 Place of current posting: CGST Delhi
South Seniority List (Serial No. 269)
13. Vineet Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 01.01.1974 S/o. Sh. Dulichand Tushir, R/o. H. No.
1065, Sec-51, Gurugram Date of Joining Department:
16.11.1992 Place of current posting: CGST Gurugram
Seniority List (Serial No. 252)
3
O.A. No.127/2023
14. Som Dutt, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
12.05.1988 S/o. Sh. Naval Singh, R/o. C-371, SGM Nagar,
Faridabad, (Haryana) Date of Joining Department: 12.12.2008
Place of current posting: Customs Preventive NCH Seniority
List (Serial No. 310)
15. Harkesh Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 15.03.1973 S/o. Late Sh. Kehar Singh Saini, R/o. WZ-
498, Near Chottu Ram Public School, Palam Village, New Delhi
Date of Joining Department: 17.10.1994 Place of current
posting: Customs Preventive NCH Seniority List (Serial No.
253)
16. G. S. Raghav, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 26.01.1978, S/o. Late Sh. K. C. Raghav, R/o. C-129A,
Mansa Ram, Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110059. Date of
Joining Department: 07.08.1997 Place of current posting:
Customs IGI Airport Seniority List (Serial No. 257)
17. Madan Singh, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 10.07.1972 S/o. Late Sh. Shiv Singh,R/o. E-622, Gali
No. - 12, West Vinod Nagar, Delhi - 110092. Date of Joining
Department: 22.07.2002 Place of current posting: ACCI NCH
Seniority List (Serial No. 265)
18. Dilip Kumar Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB:01.07.1988, S/o. Sh. Ramdin Yadav R/o. RZ-G/70, Raj
Nagar Part - II, New Delhi Date of Joining Department:
24.10.2008 Place of current posting: Customs ACCI NCH
Seniority List (Serial No. 308)
19. Anil Kumar,Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB:21.11.1975, S/o. Sh. Balwant Singh, R/o. Ward No. 17,
Safido, Jind, (Haryana) Date of Joining Department:
09.10.1996 Place of current posting: Customs ACCE NCH
Seniority List (Serial No. 234)
20. Ganesh Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C) S/o. Sh.
Chandra Mani, R/o. R.K. Puram, New Delhi Date of Joining
Department: 24.10.2008 Place of current posting: A&G NCH
Seniority List (Serial No. 290)
21. Bhaskar Bhatt Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 12.12.1987 S/o. Sh. Devi Dutt Bhatt R/o. R.K. Puram,
New Delhi Date of Joining Department: 16.10.2008 Place of
current posting: Customs Preventive NCH Seniority List (Serial
No. 289)
4
O.A. No.127/2023
22. Jaiprakash,Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
05.02.1972, S/o. Late Sh. Kaku Ram, R/o. 47-B, Vijay Colony,
Gali No. 5, Aare wala Road Bawana, Delhi - 110 039 Date of
Joining Department: 03.02.2003 Place of current posting: Air
Cargo Export Seniority List (Serial No. 274)
23. Bhagwan Singh, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB: 08.08.1974 S/o. Lt. Sh. Bhola Ram R/o. RZ A/25, Main
Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh, New Delhi- 110043 Date of Joining
Department: 29.03.1996 Place of current posting: Customs
ACCI NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 266)
24. Raj Pal, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
07.11.1974 S/o. Sh. Vipt Ram R/o. H. No. 596, R.K. Puram,
New Delhi - 110022 Date of Joining Department: 05.01.1999
Place of current posting: Customs Audit NCH Seniority List
(Serial No. 258)
25. Rajesh Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 01.07.1972 S/o. Sh. Prabhati Ram R/o. H. No. 270
Village & Post Office Kakrola, New Delhi - 110078 Date of
Joining Department: 07.02.2003 Place of current posting:
Customs Audit NCH Seniority List (Serial No. 304)
26. Sanjay Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 03.08.1975s/ 0. sh. Rattan Singh, R/ o. VPO Barwasni,
Distt-Sonipat, (Haryana) Date of Joining Department:
15.09.1994 Place of current posting: Customs Preventive NCH
Seniority List (Serial No. 230)
27. Hemant Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 01.08.1987 S/o. Sh. Kailash Chandra, R/o. H. No. D-
366, Tagore Garden, New Delhi Date of Joining Department:
30.09.2008 Place of current posting: Customs Preventive NCH
Seniority List (Serial No. 277)
28. Vipin Kumar Tyagi, Working as Tax Assistant (Group -
'C) S/o. Sh. L. R. Tyagi, R/o. S-184 Pandav Nagar, Delhi -
110092 Date of Joining Department: 01.01.1988 Place of
current posting: CGST Delhi East Seniority List (Serial No.
280)
29. Braham Pal, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
28.07.1972, S/o. Late Sh. Atar Singh, R/o. H. No. B-216 A,
Street No.1, Bank Colony, Mandli Village, Delhi - 110 093.
Date of Joining Department: 10.02.2003- Place of current
posting: CGST Delhi East Seniority List (Serial No. 237)
5
O.A. No.127/2023
30. Prahlad Singh Godara, Working as Tax Assistant (Group
- C) DOB: 03.04.1985 S/ 0. Late Sh. Jai Bhagwan R/o. VPO
Bharthal, New Delhi Date of Joining Department: 10.11.2008
Place of current posting: Customs A&G NCH Seniority List
(Serial No. 315)
31. Navneet Singh Kathait, Working as Tax Assistant
(Group - C) DOB: 19.03.1983 S/0. Late Sh. Ranbir Singh R/o.
Road No. 3/176, Andrews Ganj, New Delhi Date of Joining
Department: 04.03.2015 Place of current posting: CGST Delhi
South Seniority List (Serial No. 286)
32. Rakesh Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 01.12.1981 S/o. Sh. Ranbir Singh, R/o. Village Bhusli,
P.O. Maduban, Distt. Karnal (Haryana) Date of Joining
Department: 31.10.2008 Place of current posting: CGST
Panchkula Seniority List (Serial No. 310)
33. Karamveer, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
24.10.1968, S/o. Late Sh. Manohar Lal, R/o. A-438 Minto
Road Complex, New Delhi - 110 002. Date of Joining
Department: 04.06.1993 Place of current posting: ICD TKD
Export Seniority List (Serial No. 264)
34. Rahul Haq, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
22.10.1988, S/o. Altaf Husain, R/o. C-1223, Sangam Vihar,
New Delhi Date of Joining Department: 01.11.2008 Place of
current posting: CGST Faridabad Seniority List (Serial No. 281)
35. Gaurav, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
13.07.1987 S/o. Sh. Subhash Chander,R/o. 1253/7 Kaisthan
Maholla, Near Old Post Office, Rohtak. Date of Joining
Department: 17.10.2008 Place of current posting: ICD TKD
EXPORT Seniority List (Serial No. 307)
36. Ravi Kumar Mahendra Working as Tax Assistant (Group
- 'C) DOB: 26.02.1989 S/o. Sh. Raj Kumar, R/o. E-64, Type -
II, Moti Bagh, New Delhi - 110021 Date of Joining Department:
31.10.2008 Place of current posting: ICD TKD EXPORT
Seniority List (Serial No. 291)
37. Somnath Ranga, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB: 10.04.1983 S/o. Sh. Lt. Hari Singh, R/o. H.No. 1198,
Layal Pur Colony, Kurushetra HR. Date of Joining Department:
01.04.2017 Place of current posting: CGST Rohtak Seniority
List (Serial No. 283)
6
O.A. No.127/2023
38. Swami Nath Shah, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 25.03.1986 S/o. Lt. Sh. Ram Narayan Shah R/o.
103/12, Sector I, Pushp Vihar, New Delhi - 110017 Date of
Joining Department: 24.01.2006 Place of current posting: ICD
TKD EXPORT Seniority List (Serial No. 271)
39. Sunil Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 21.12.1997, S/o. Sh. Bhola Ram R/o. H. No. 357/59,
Gali No. 14, Block - Ashok Vihar, Phase - 1, Gurugram -
122001Date of Joining Department: 26.03.1999 Place of
current posting: ICD TKD EXPORT Seniority List (Serial No.
259)
40. Lalit Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 30.12.1970 S/o. Lt. Sh. Mamla Ram, R/o. E-53, Street
No. 17A Sadh Nagar, Palam Colony, New Delhi - 110045 Date
of Joining Department: 12.09.1994 Place of current posting:
ICD TKD EXPORT Seniority List (Serial No. 220)
41. Praveen Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB: 04.02.1972 5/0. sh. Kam Jiwan, R/o. A1/69C, Vijay
Enclave, Delh1 - 45 Date of Joining Department: 28.11.1997
Place of current posting: CGST North Seniority List (Serial No.
260)
42. Ajit Singh, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C) DOB:
01.05.1974 S/o. Lt. Sh. Inderjeet Singh, R/o. RZ D23 Main
Gopal Nagar, Najafgarh, New Delhi - 110043 Date of Joining
Department: 29.03.1996 Place of current posting: ICD TKD
EXPORT Seniority List (Serial No. 267)
43. Narender Kumar Sharma, Working as Tax Assistant
(Group - 'C) DOB: 08.09.1970 S/o. Sh. Harprasad Sharma,
R/o. F-107, Sadh Nagar - II, Palam Colony, New Delhi - 45
Date of Joining Department: 16.11.1993 Place of current
posting: CGST Delhi East Seniority List (Serial No. 200)
44. Devender Singh,Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 01.03.1987 S/o. Sh. Roop Singh, R/o. C-3/281, Lodhi
Colony, New Delhi - 110003 Date of Joining Department:
10.11.2008 Place of current posting: CGST Delhi North
Seniority List (Serial No. 285)
7
O.A. No.127/2023
45. Naveen Rana, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 10.03.1989 S/o. Lt. Sh. Mohan Singh Rana R/o. H. No.
131/15, Pushp Vihar, Delhi. Date of Joining Department:
24.10.2008 Place of current posting: Customs ICD PPG
Seniority List (Serial No. 283)
46. Arun Kumar, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - 'C)
DOB: 10.10.1968 S/ 0. Lt. Sh. Dharamveer Singh R/o. F-374,
Gali No. 8B, Swatra Nagar, Narela, Delhi - 110040 Date of
Joining Department: 12.09.1994 Place of current posting:
Customs ACCE Seniority List (Serial No. 256)
47. Sanjay Rawat, Working as Tax Assistant (Group - C)
DOB: 16.01.1980, S/o. Lt. Sh. Raghubir Singh Rawat, R/o. H.
No. 107, Sector - 8, R.K. Puram, New Delhi. Date of Joining
Department: 23.07.1998 Place of current posting: Customs
ICD PPG Seniority List (Serial No. 302).
...Applicants
Vs
1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of
Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New
Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chairman, CBIC, North Block, New Delhi - 110001.
3. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER (CADRE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) DELHI GST ZONE, C.R.
BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002.
4. Ankit Chadhary ,DOB: 20.06.1990, Through (CADRE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) DELHI GST ZONE, C.R.
BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002 (Sr. No.10).
5. Deepak DOB: 20.04.1991, Through (CADRE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) DELHI GST ZONE, C.R.
BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002 (Sr. No.08).
6. Vikas Kumar DOB: 21.12.1998, Through (CADRE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) DELHI GST ZONE, C.R.
BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002 (Sr. No. 140).
7. Sunil Kumar DOB: 30.11.1992, Through (CADRE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) DELHI GST ZONE,C.R.
BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002 (Sr. No.137).
8. Deepak DOB: 24.08.1993, Through (CADRE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) DELHI GST ZONE, C.R.
BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002 (Sr. No.191).
8
O.A. No.127/2023
9. Kuldeep DOB: 15.08.1992, Through (CADRE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) DELHI GST ZONE, C.R.
BUILDING, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI - 110002 (Sr. No.192).
...Respondents
Advocate for Applicants: Mr. Harpreet Singh with
Mr. G.D. Chawla
Advocate for Respondents: Mr. N.D. Kaushik
ORDER
AS PER AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER JUDICIAL:
Applicants are working as promotee Tax-Assistants under CGST, Delhi Zone and filed present OA invoking jurisdiction of this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Adminitrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking following main relief (s) [as extracted from the OA] reads as -
"(i) Quash and set aside the impugned seniority list dated 28.10.2022 (Annexure: A/1) and direct the respondents to fix the seniority of applicants and direct recruits Tax Assistants on the basis of their date of joining/substantive appointment; and
(ii) To declare the action of respondents in granting seniority to the direct Tax Assistants from the date of occurrence of vacancy as illegal and issue consequential directions for fixing the seniority of applicants above the direct recruits Tax Assistants in the cadre of Tax Assistant strictly on the basis of actual appointment; and
(iii) Award costs of the present OA in favour of the Applicants;
(iv) Pass any other order/orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.9 O.A. No.127/2023
FACTS IN BRIEF
2. Briefly stated facts as adumbrated by the applicants in the OA that all the applicants promoted as Tax Assistants during year 2015-2018 vide different orders. The official respondents also filled up posts of Tax Assistants against Direct Recruitment quota and direct recruit/respondents joined as Tax Assistant during year 2016-2019. The post of Tax Assistant is the feeder cadre post for next promotional post of Executive Assistant.
2.1 Respondents have completed the process of filling up of the posts of Tax Assistants in accordance with the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Tax Assistant Group-C Posts, Recruitment Rules. The respondents notified draft seniority list dated 05.04.2019 in the cadre of Tax Assistant as per O.M. dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 as on 30.03.2019 and called representations till 08.04.2019. Applicants preferred representations, OA No.189/2021 and CP No.30/2022 to issue correct final seniority list, meanwhile respondents issued final seniority list dated 28.10.2022 impugned in present OA and in contempt Petition No.30/2022, liberty was extended to challenge final seniority list dated 28.10.2022.
2.2 Present OA has been filed challenging final seniority list dated 28.10.2022 (Annexure A_1) whereby applicants promotee Tax Assistant of year 2015-2018 placed below the Direct recruit Tax Assistant through SSC of year 2016-2019. Applicants deserve to be placed in accordance with their date of promotion as Tax Assistants and respondents joined as Direct Recruit Tax Assistant after April, 2016, 2017 and October 2018 deserves to be placed below the applicants. Hence, the impugned seniority list dated 28.10.2022 deserves to be re-casted and applicants be placed above private 10 O.A. No.127/2023 respondents from serial no.,7-8, 136-137, 191-195 from date of their promotion as Tax Assistant.
3. Per contra, official respondents have contested the claim of applicants-promotee Tax Assistants that all the applicants were promoted as Tax Assistants and appointed and joined during period 2016-2018. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K.Meghachandra & Ors. Vs. Ningam Siro & Ors., decided on 19.11.2019, reported in (2020) 5 SCC 689 and DOP&T vide O.M. dated 13.08.2021 issued revised instructions relating to seniority of direct recruits and promotees and inter-seniority thereof. Para 7 (iii) of DoP&T OM dated 13.08.2021 stipulates that now in case of direct recruits and promotees appointed/joined between 27.11.2012 and 18.11.2019 and in which case inter-se-seniority could not be finalized by 18.11.2019, also be governed by provisions of OMs dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 read with OM dated 04.03.2014, unless where a different formulation/manner of seniority has been decided by any Tribunal or Court.
3.1 Respondents have also made averments in the W.S. that applicants have correctly made impugned seniority list dated 28.10.2022 in terms of DOP&T OM dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 and 11.11.2010 and in terms of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K. Meghachandra (supra). The para 7 (iii) of OM dated 13.08.2021 so far as promotee applicants and respondents- direct recruits appointed/joined during period between 27.11.2012 and 18.11.2019 and in present case inter-se- seniority could not be finalized by 18.11.2019 shall be governed by provisions of OMs dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 read with OM dated 04.03.2014 unless a different manner of determination of seniority has been decided by the Court of Tribunal.
11 O.A. No.127/20234. Private respondents no.4 to 7 have also filed the counter- reply contesting the claim of the promotee - applicants that they were appointed by way of direct recruitment notified in year 2014 and 2015, whereas applicants in the OA joined during 2016-2018. Joining of direct recruit - private respondents was delayed due to finalizing the selection and respondents rightly granted seniority to direct recruit over and above the promotee-applicants in light of DOP&T OM dated 04.03.2014 and OM dated 13.08.2021 that in cases of direct recruit and promotee appointed/joining during period between 27.11.2012 to 18.11.2019, their inter se seniority shall be govered byOM dated 04.03.2014. The applicants joined in year 2018 and respondents could not join earlier due to lapses on part of respondents and impugned seniority list related to as on 31.03.2019. Decision in the case of K. Meghachandra (supra) has been referred to a larger Bench in case of Hariharan & Ors. vs. Harsh Vardhan Singh Rao & Ors., reported in 2022 SCC Online 1717and same is per-incuriam.
SUBMISSIONS
5. Learned counsel for the applicants argued and can be summarized as under -
(i) Applicants were promoted as Tax Assistants against promotional quota during year 2015-2018 and no seniority list was notified. The private respondents and other direct recruits appointed and joined during 2016-2019. Respondents have issued inter-se-Draft Seniority list dated 05.04.2019 and invited objections. The impugned final seniority list dated 28.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) in the cadre of Tax Assistant as per DOPT OM dated 07.02.1986/30.03.19/13.08.2021 issued after 19.11.2019 is in flagrant violation of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K.Meghachandra (supra).
12 O.A. No.127/2023(ii) The impugned seniority list was published on 28.10.2022 and prior to it draft seniority list dated 05.04.2019 as on 30.03.2019 was issued and vide order dated 01.02.2021 in OA No.189/2021 filed by applicants, respondents were directed to decide pending objections to draft seniority list dated 05.04.2019 and Contempt Petition no.30/2022 in OA No.189/2021 was filed thereafter impugned final seniority dated 28.10.2022 was issued much after cut-off date of 19.11.2019 and law laid down in earlier overruled judgment in case of N.R. Parmar (supra) would not be applicable.
(iii) The issue involved in this case is identical to case of Yash Rattna & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. in WP(C) No.3576/2021 decided on 09.04.2021 by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi upheld in S.L.P. and also squarely covered by law laid down in case of Ravi Kumar vs. Union of India & Ors. in WP (C) 7674/2022 decided on 28.05.2022 by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the official respondents would submit supporting the impugned seniority list dated 28.10.2022 as -
(i) The process of finalizing and issuing inter-se-seniority list for direct recruits and promotee for the post of Tax Assistants commenced much earlier to judgment on 19.11.2019 in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) and draft seniority list issued on 05.04.2019 as on 30.03.2019 and final seniority list issued on 28.10.2022, hence the law laid down in case of N.R. Parmar will be applicable. So also K. Meghachandra (supra) judgment has not attained finality and same has been referred to larger Bench in case of Hariharan & Ors. vs. Harsh Vardhan Singh Rao & Ors. (supra).
(ii) Impugned final seniority list dated 28.10.2022 has been finalized in terms of DOP&T OM dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 13 O.A. No.127/2023 and OM dated 13.08.2021 and in light of law laid down in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) and in compliance to order passed in OA No.189/2021 and CP No.30/2022 in OA No.189/2021 and there is no illegality.
7. Learned counsel for the private respondents no.4 to 7 argued and can be summarized as -
(i) The private respondents appointed as Tax Assistants by direct recruitment notified in year 2014 and 2015 whereas applicants promoted and joined during 2016-2018. The delay was on part of respondents to finalize direct recruitment and rightly given seniority vide impugned seniority list dated 28.10.2022. Respondents have rightly followed OM dated 04.03.2014 as well as OM dated 13.08.2021 and applicants joined during 27.11.2012 - 18.11.2019 and seniority rightly fixed as per DOP&T OM dated 04.03.2014 and 13.08.2021.
(ii) Impugned seniority list dated 28.10.2022 is in consonance with N.R. Parmar & Ors. and law laid down in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) and also referred to larger bench in case of Hariharan (supra).
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS
8. We have bestowed our anxious considerations on the rival contentions of learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material placed on record as well as considered the precedents relied.
9. Admitted facts in the case are that appointment to the post of Tax Assistant is made by direct recruitment and promotion in accordance with Central Excise and Customs Department Tax Assistant (Group-C post) Recruitment Rules. Applicants in the present OA were promoted and appointed during period 2016-2018 and private respondents direct recruits appointed and joined during 2016-2019 though 14 O.A. No.127/2023 against advertisement to fill vacancies for year 2014-2015, joining given after 3 to 4 years. Respondents issued inter-se- draft seniority list dated 05.04.2019 as on 30.03.2019 and in OA NO.189/2021 filed by applicants vide order dated 01.02.2021, direction was issued to decide objections against draft seniority list dated 05.04.2019 for cadre of Tax Assistants as direct recruits Tax Assistants who were appointed after promotee were shown as seniors in case final seniority list was not issued. Undisputedly, the final seniority list in the cadre of Tax Assistants issued on 28.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) impugned in this OA.
10. Dispute in the present case, the stand of official respondents that the process of issuing seniority list had commenced before coming into pronouncement in case of K.Meghachandra (supra) on 19.11.2019 and draft/provisional seniority list for the Tax Assistant Grade was issued on 05.04.2019 as per OM dated 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 as per law laid down in judgment dated 27.11.2012 in N.R. Parmar (supra) and after consideration of objections final seniority list dated 28.10.2022 was issued. The decision of N.R. Parmar (supra) has been overruled and same is only prospective and will not have impact on impugned seniority list dated 28.10.2022 for which the initiation of process has commenced much before the pronouncement of K.Meghachandra (supra).
THE ISSUE
11. From the above submissions of learned counsel for parties and material placed on record, the issue arises for our consideration -
"Whether the impugned final seniority list dated 28.10.2022 in the cadre of Tax Assistants under Central Goods & Service Tax, Delhi Zone is to be finalized in terms 15 O.A. No.127/2023 of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment of Union of India & Ors. vs. N.R. Parmar & Ors. (2012) 13 SCC 340 or in K. Meghachandra Singh & Ors. vs. Ningam Siro & Ors. (2020) 5 SCC 689 in which the earlier judgment of N.R. Parmar (supra) was overruled with prospective effect i.e. 19.11.2019 onwards seniority cannot be claimed from the date when the incumbent is yet to be borne in the cadre?"
12. To appreciate the issue arising in the present OA, we would like to refer the basic facts not in dispute. Applicants were appointed during the year 2016 to 2018 as evident from paragraph 4.1 of the OA - details of appointment of all the applicants on promotion as Tax Assistant given in the table and not disputed by the respondents. The private respondents- direct recruits on the post of Tax Assistants selected pursuant to advertisement for vacancies of year 2014-2015 and joined after 3 to 4 years between year 2016-2019, after the date of joining of promotees-applicants.
13. Undisputedly, the official respondents issued draft seniority list dated 05.04.2019 in terms of judgment in case of N.R. Parmar (supra) case, wherein private respondents-the direct recruit Tax Assistants who were appointed after the promotees-applicants were shown as seniors.
14. Applicants in the present OA earlier filed OA No.189/2021 Chetan Prakash Bhatt & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. This Tribunal vide order dated 1st Feb., 2021 , directed respondents that in case the final seniority list for the post of Tax Assistants has not been published yet, the objections if any, submitted by the applicants, shall be taken into account. We have carefully examined the order dated 01.02.2021 in case of applicants and it is clear as noon day that OA No.189/2021 was disposed of with specific direction that in 16 O.A. No.127/2023 case the final seniority list for the post of Tax Assistants has not yet been published than only the objections to be decided.
15. Admittedly, official respondents did not finalize seniority list in the cadre of Tax Assistants in year 2021, even pursuant to direction in OA NO.189/2021 to decide objections, if seniority not finalized. The applicants filed Contempt Petition No.30/2021 and impugned final seniority list in the cadre of Tax Assistants vide order dated 28.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) was issued. Thereafter, vide order dated 31.10.2022 (Annexure A-5), C.P. No.30/2022 in OA No.189/2021 was closed. It is abundantly clear that official respondents did not finalize impugned final seniority list dated 28.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) till 28.10.2022 in spite of order dated 01.02.2021 in OA No.189/2021 in the case in hand. It is the admitted fact and fact of the matter that the impugned final seniority list issued on 28.10.2022, after pronouncement dated 19.11.2019 by Hon'ble Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K.Meghachandra (supra) wherein decision in N.R. Parmar (supra) was overruled and it was conscious decision by Their Lordships that the decision will apply prospectively and if the inter-se seniority not already prepared based on N.R. Parmar (supra) than inter-se-seniority is to be fixed as per law laid down in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) and the inter-se- seniority w.e.f. 19.11.2019 has to be made that seniority direct recruits had to be fixed from the date of appointment and not from the date of initiation of recruitment process. Admittedly, the official respondents published impugned final seniority list on 28.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) in terms of N.R. Parmar (supra) overruled prospectively w.e.f. 19.11.2019 and once impugned final inter-se-seniority list was issued on 28.10.2022 for the first time in terms of overruled judgment, same deserves to be quashed and set aside with direction to re-cast the fresh seniority list in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in K. Meghachandra (supra).
17 O.A. No.127/202316. In case of Ahmadsahab Abdul Mulla vs. Bibijan & Ors. (2009) 5 SCC 462. Their Lordships observed that the use of term "fixed" among the words except where "seniority is to be fixed" has to be understood meant, "having become final or crystallized form or character and not subject matter to change or fluctuation". In the case in our hand draft/provisional seniority issued on 05.04.2019 as on 30.03.2019 and objections were not decided in spite direction vide order dated 01.02.2021 in OA No.189/2021 and after filing C.P. No.30/2022 impugned final seniority list published for the first time on 28.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) based on overruled judgment in N.R. Parmar (supra) and misinterpreting OM dated 13.08.2021 and 07.02.1986/03.07.1986 and without taking into consideration law laid down in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) which already overruled judgment in N.R. Parmar (supra) case with prospective effect 19.11.2019. The impugned final inter-se seniority list for post of Tax Assistants is issued on 28.10.2022 after 19.11.2019 has to be in terms of legal preposition laid down in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) hence deserves to be re-casted accordingly.
17. In K. Meghachandra (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court held, relevant paragraphs 37 to 39 for ready reference reproduced as under:-
"37. When we carefully read the judgment in N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340: (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] , it appears to us that the referred OMs (dated 7-2-1986 and 3-7-1986) 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 N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] 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 was 18 O.A. No.127/2023 indicated in the two OMs dated 7-2-1986 and 3-7-1986 and that is why the Government issued the subsequent OM on 3-3-2008 by way of clarification of the two earlier OMs.
38. At this stage, we must also emphasise that the Court in N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] need not have observed that the selected candidate cannot be blamed for administrative delay and the gap between initiation of process and appointment. Such observation is fallacious inasmuch as none can be identified as being a selected candidate on the date when the process of recruitment had commenced. On that day, a body of persons aspiring to be appointed to the vacancy intended for direct recruits was not in existence. The persons who might respond to an advertisement cannot have any service-related rights, not to talk of right to have their seniority counted from the date of the advertisement. In other words, only on completion of the process, the applicant morphs into a selected candidate and, therefore, unnecessary observation was made in N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 :
(2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] to the effect that the selected candidate cannot be blamed for the administrative delay. In the same context, we may usefully refer to the ratio in Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India [Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India, (1991) 3 SCC 47 : 1991 SCC (L&S) 800] , where it was held that even upon empanelment, an appointee does not acquire any right.
39. The judgment in N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] relating to the Central Government employees cannot in our opinion, automatically apply to the Manipur State Police Officers, governed by the MPS Rules, 1965. We also feel that N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 :
(2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] had incorrectly distinguished the long-
standing seniority determination principles propounded in, inter alia, Jagdish Ch. Patnaik [Jagdish Ch. Patnaik v. State of Orissa, (1998) 4 SCC 456 : 1998 SCC (L&S) 1156] , Suraj Parkash Gupta v. State of J&K [Suraj Parkash Gupta v. State of J&K, (2000) 7 SCC 561 : 2000 SCC (L&S) 977] and Pawan Pratap Singh v. Reevan Singh [Pawan Pratap Singh v. Reevan Singh, (2011) 3 SCC 267 : (2011) 1 SCC (L&S) 481] . These three judgments and several others with like enunciation on the law for determination of seniority makes it abundantly clear that under service jurisprudence, seniority cannot be claimed from a date when the incumbent is yet to be borne in the cadre. In our considered opinion, the law on the issue is correctly declared in Jagdish Ch. Patnaik [Jagdish Ch. Patnaik v. State of Orissa, (1998) 4 SCC 456 : 1998 SCC (L&S) 1156] and consequently we disapprove the norms on assessment of inter se seniority, suggested in N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] . Accordingly, the decision in N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] is overruled. However, it is made clear that this decision will not affect the inter se seniority already based on N.R. Parmar [Union of India v. N.R. Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340 : (2013) 3 SCC (L&S) 711] 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."
19 O.A. No.127/2023[Emphasis supplied]
18. We have extracted relevant paragraphs in case of K. Meghachandra (supra). Their Lordships held that OMs dated 07.02.1986 and 03.07.1986 were not properly construed in case of N.R. Parmar (supra) and said OMs clearly made that seniority of direct recruits had to be fixed from the date of appointment and not from the date of initiation of recruitment process. Only upon completion of the selection process, a candidate becomes a selected candidate and, therefore, the finding in N.R. Parmar's case (Supra) was not correct and in service jurisprudence, seniority cannot be claimed from the date when the employee is yet to be borne in the cadre and norms in case of N.R. Parmar (supra) were overruled with prospective effect i.e. 19.11.2019.
19. In the present case, the impugned final seniority list has been issued by respondents on 28.10.2022 after 19.11.2019 and in our considered opinion, therefore, has to be re-casted afresh in terms of decision in case of K. Meghachandra (supra).
20. Learned counsel for respondents much emphasized that judgment in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) has been referred to a Larger Bench and this Tribunal should follow and adjourn this OA sine die.
21. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case of Ombeer Singh Parmar & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., vide judgment dated 25.03.2025. Their Lordships seisin with similar issue and contention held and binding on us. Relevant paragraphs 10 to 18 reads as -
"10. From a reading of the above, it would be apparent that the Supreme Court has clarified that it is only upon completion of the selection process, that the person so selected can claim seniority and that such seniority cannot be claimed from the date when the incumbent is yet to be born in the Cadre.20 O.A. No.127/2023
11. It is further clarified that though the decision in Union of India v. N.R.Parmar, (2012) 13 SCC 340, has been overruled, however, the decision will not affect the inter se seniority already based on N.R.Parmar (supra) and the same is protected. The decision in K.Meghachandra Singh (supra) was therefore, held to be applicable prospectively.
12. In the present case, the impugned seniority list, has been issued by the respondents on 19.04.2023. The same therefore, has to be governed by the decision of the Supreme Court in K.Meghachandra Singh (supra).
13. Applying the above principle, retrospective seniority even before the personnel is born in the Cadre, cannot be granted. The impugned seniority list insofar as it determined seniority in violation of the said principal, is liable to be quashed.
14. As far as the prayer of the learned counsel for the respondents that as the judgment in K.Meghachandra Singh (supra) has been referred to a Larger Bench, this Court should adjourn the present petition sine die is concerned, it is settled law that merely because the Supreme Court has referred a judgment to the Larger Bench, it would not prohibit or restrain the High Court from following the judgment that is presently holding forth.
15. In this regard, we may make a reference to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union Territory of Ladakh & Ors. v. Jammu and Kashmir National Conference & Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1140, wherein this principle has been explained as under :
"32. The Court would categorically emphasize that no litigant should have even an iota of doubt or an impression (rather, a misimpression) that just because of systemic delay or the matter not being taken up by the Courts resulting in efflux of time the cause would be defeated, and the Court would be rendered helpless to ensure justice to the party concerned. It would not be out of place to mention that this Court can even turn the clock back, if the situation warrants such dire measures. The powers of this Court, if need be, to even restore status quo ante are not in the realm of any doubt. The relief(s) granted in the lead opinion by Hon. Khehar, J. (as the learned Chief Justice then was), concurred with by the other 4 learned Judges, in Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix v Deputy Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, (2016) 8 SCC 1 is enough on this aspect. We know full well that a 5-Judge Bench in Subhash Desai v Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 607 has referred Nabam Rebia (supra) to a Larger Bench. However, the questions referred to the Larger Bench do not detract from the power to bring back status quo ante. That apart, it is settled that mere reference to a larger Bench does not unsettle declared law. In Harbhajan Singh v State of Punjab, (2009) 13 SCC 608, a 2-Judge Bench said:21 O.A. No.127/2023
"15. Even if what is contended by the learned counsel is correct, it is not for us to go into the said question at this stage; herein cross- examination of the witnesses had taken place. The Court had taken into consideration the materials available to it for the purpose of arriving at a satisfaction that a case for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 319 of the Code was made out. Only because the correctness of a portion of the judgment in Mohd. Shafi [(2007) 14 SCC 544 : (2009) 1 SCC (Cri) 889 : (2007) 4 SCR 1023 : (2007) 5 Scale 611] has been doubted by another Bench, the same would not mean that we should wait for the decision of the larger Bench, particularly when the same instead of assisting the appellants runs counter to their contention."
(emphasis supplied)
16. However, keeping in view that the reference is pending before the Larger Bench, we direct that the seniority list, which shall be redrawn by the respondents pursuant to our judgment, shall be subject to the outcome of the reference.
17. The respondents shall rework the Seniority List and publish the revised list after considering objections, if any, filed to a draft seniority list, within six months from today.
18. The petition is disposed of in the above terms."
[Emphasis supplied]
22. Judgment dated 25.03.2025 in case of Ombeer Singh Parmar (supra) passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi was challenged in Special Leave to Appeal No.220090/2025 titled Union of India vs. Ombeer Singh Parmar and same has been dismissed vide order dated 01.08.2025 and the issue in this case in hand is also squarely covered and binding on us.
23. In Yash Rattan & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. WP(C) No.3576/2021 vide judgment dated 09.04.2021 passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Their Lordships held as "16. We have examined the rival contentions. It is a matter of fact that the seniority position in the present case was not finally settled when the judgment in the case of K. Meghachandra Singh (supra) was delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 13th November, 2019. The impugned seniority list was issued on 15th March, 2018 and immediately thereafter, various representations were filed on behalf of the private respondents against the said seniority list. When no response was received on the said representations, the private respondents filed the OA before the CAT, challenging the said seniority list, from which the present petition arises. In fact, OA was 22 O.A. No.127/2023 also filed before the judgment in K. Meghachandra Singh judgment (supra) was delivered. Therefore, it is incorrect on the part of the petitioners to say that the seniority position was settled and therefore the same has to be protected in terms of the judgment in K. Meghachandra Singh judgment (supra). Accordingly, once the seniority list itself was subject matter of challenge before CAT, the law laid down in the case of K. Meghachandra Singh (supra) had to be applied. The following paragraphs from the judgment in K. Meghachandra Singh (supra) may be referred to:-
"37. When we carefully read the judgment in N.R.Parmar, it appears to us that the referred OMs (dated 7-2-1986 and 3-7- 1986) were not property 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 N.R. Parmar 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 was indicated in the two OMs dated 7-2-1986 and 3-
71986 and that is why the Government issued the subsequent OM on 3-3-2008 by way of clarification of the two earlier OMs.
38. At this stage, we must also emphasis that the Court in N.R. Parmar need not have observed that the selected candidate cannot be blamed for administrative delay and the gap between the initiation of process and appointment. Such observation is fallacious inasmuch as none can be identified as being a selected candidate on the date when the process of recruitment had commenced. On that day, a body of persons aspiring to be appointed to the vacancy intended for direct recruits was not in existence. The persons who might respond to an advertisement cannot have any service-related rights, not to talk of right to have their seniority counted from the date of the advertisement. In other words, only on completion of the process, the applicant morphs into a selected candidate and, therefore, unnecessary observation was made in N.R. Parmar to the effect that the selected candidate cannot be blamed for the administrative delay. In the same context, we may usefully refer to the ratio in Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India, where it was held that even upon empanelment, an appointee does not acquire any right.
39. The judgment in N.R. Parmar relating to the Central Government employees cannot in our opinion, automatically apply to the Manipur State Police Officers, governed by the MPS Rules, 1965. We also feel that N.R. Parmar had incorrectly distinguished the long-standing seniority determination principles, propounded in, inter alia, Jagdish Ch. Patnaik, Suraj Parkash Gupta v. State of J&K and Pawan Pratap Singh v. Reevan Singh. These three judgments and several others with like enunciation on the law for determination of seniority makes it abundantly clear that under service jurisprudence, seniority cannot be claimed from a date when the incumbent is yet to be borne in the cadre. In our considered opinion, the law on the issue is correctly 23 O.A. No.127/2023 declared in Jagdish Ch. Patnaik and consequently we disapprove the norms on assessment of inter se seniority, suggested in N.R. Parmar. 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."
17. From a reading of the above passages, the dicta of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that emerges, can be summarized, as below:-
(i) OMs dated 07.02.1986 and 03.07.1986 were not properly construed in the N.R. Parmar (supra) judgment. The said OMs made it clear that seniority of direct recruits had to be fixed from the date of appointment and not from the date of initiation of recruitment process;
(ii) Persons aspiring to be appointed to a vacant post do not have any vested right. Only upon completion of the selection process, a candidate becomes a selected candidate and therefore, the finding in N.R. Parmar (supra) that the selected candidate cannot be blamed for administrative delay, was not correct;
(iii) N.R. Parmar (supra) has incorrectly distinguished the longstanding seniority determination principles propounded in the following cases:-
(a) Jagdish Ch. Patnaik Vs. State of Orissa, (1998) 4 SCC 456;
(b) Suraj Prakash Gupta Vs. State of J&K, (2000) 7 SCC 561; and,
(c) Pawan Pratap Singh Vs. Reevan Singh, (2011) 3 SCC 267
(iv) In service jurisprudence, seniority cannot be claimed from the date when the incumbent is yet to be borne in the cadre and therefore, norms on assessment of inter se seniority, suggested in N.R. Parmar (supra) case were disapproved;
(v) Decision in N.R. Parmar (supra) case is overruled, however the decision will not affect the inter se seniority already based on N.R. Parmar (supra) case and the same is protected. Decision will apply prospectively.
18. Therefore, in our view CAT has correctly applied the dicta in K. Meghachandra Singh (supra) case in the present case and has proceeded to quash the seniority list to the extent it placed the petitioners above the private respondents. The fact that the CAT decision would impact the inter se seniority between the promotees and direct recruits (petitioners), is not the subject matter of the present petition, and therefore, need not be examined. It is also an admitted position that in the present case requisitions for the appointment of the petitioners were sent to SSC the recruiting authority on 11th February, 2015, after the private respondents had already joined the Delhi Commissionerate. Therefore, even in terms of OM dated 4th March, 2014, the petitioners cannot be placed above the private respondents."
[Emphasis supplied] 24 O.A. No.127/2023
24. Judgment dated 09.04.2021 in case of Yash Rattan (supra) passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has been upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court and Special Leave to Appeal No.11046/2022 filed by Union of India vs. Yash Rattan & Ors. dismissed vide order dated 12.07.2022. The issue involved in the case in our hand is no more res-integra and also covered by said judgments cited hereinabove.
25. In case of Sandeep Rai & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. [OA No.1656/2022 (Delhi), This Tribunal vide order dated 09.02.2023, seisin with similar issue, facts and contentions allowed the OA as provisional seniority list only issued in 2021 and impugned final seniority list dated 17.06.2022 fixing inter- se seniority of direct recruits over promotee in light of para 7
(iii) & (iv) of DOP&T OM dated 13.08.2021 has been quashed to prepare afresh and the present case in our hand is no different. Relevant paragraph 9 reads as under:-
"9. In view of the above, it is evident that the applicants were promoted as Assistant Director Census Operations before the direct recruits. The respondents have issued the provisional seniority list only in 2021, which was subsequently withdrawn. The impugned seniority list dated 17.06.2022 has been issued by fixing the inter se seniority of the direct recruits i.e. private respondents over the applicants. The respondents have undertaken the said exercise by interpreting the para-7(iii) & (iv) of DoP&T O.M. dated13.08.2021. They have not considered the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra's case (supra), which over rules the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in N.R. Parmar's case (supra). There is no ambiguity to the effect of the judgment in K. Meghachandra's case (supra), which is prospective. This makes it abundantly clear that the seniority list, which is being finalized post 19.12.2019 has to be made in terms of the law laid down in K. Meghachandra's case (supra) and not by N.R. Parmar's case (supra) especially in the present case where no provisional or final seniority list had been issued or circulated prior to 2019.
The implementation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment, which shall be prospective in nature should be with a date when the same has been decided. A provisional seniority list or final seniority list after this judgment in 2022 has to be in accordance with Meghachandra's case (supra) and not as interpreted by the respondents for persons recruited prior to 2019, whose seniority had not been finalized or fixed in terms of N.R. Parmar's case (supra) during 2012-2019.
10. In view of the above mentioned, the O.A. is allowed and the impugned seniority list dated 17.06.2022 is set aside. The respondents are directed to consider preparing fresh seniority list in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in K. Meghachandra's (supra) refixing the seniority of the applicants vis-a-vis the private respondents accordingly. This exercise is to be completed within a period of three months from the date of issue of this order. There shall be no order as to costs."
[Emphasis supplied] 25 O.A. No.127/2023
26. What comes out loud and clear from the above that applicants were promoted to the post of Tax Assistants during period 2016-2018 and private respondents are direct recruits appointed and joined during 2016-2019 after promotees. Respondents have issued draft/provisional seniority list dated 05.04.2019 as on 30.03.2019 and placed direct recruits over and above promotees. Direct recruits have been assigned inter- se seniority in the cadre of Tax Assistants on the basis of year of occurrence of vacancies and not from date of actual appointment, whereas promotees assigned seniority as per date of appointment in accordance with judgment in case of N.R. Parmar's case (supra). Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) held that OM dated 07.02.1986 and 03.07.1986 were not properly construed and overruled decision in case of N.R. Parmar (supra) case that seniority of direct recruits had to be fixed from the date of appointment and not from the date of initiation of recruitment process and seniority cannot be claimed from the date when the incumbent is yet to be borne in the cadre and decision in N.R. Parmar (supra) overruled, however, the decision will not affect the inter-se seniority already based on N.R. Parmar (supra) and decision in K. Meghachandra (supra) shall apply prospectively w.e.f. 19.11.2019. In this case in our hand, the impugned final inter-se seniority for cadre of Tax Assistants under Central Goods & Service Tax, Delhi Zone as on 30.03.2019 for first time finalized on 28.10.2022 after judgment dated 19.11.2019 in case of K.Meghachandra (supra) and same, therefore, has to be governed by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Meghachandra (supra). So also as per judgment dated 25.03.2025 in WP(C) No.6694/2024, Ombeer Singh Parmar (supra) passed by our own Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, keeping in view the reference in K. Meghachandra (supra), the re-casted fresh seniority list shall be subject to outcome of the reference.
26 O.A. No.127/2023CONCLUSION
27. We have already analyzed in detail the issue in light of aforesaid analysis. Accordingly, the issue is decided in favour of applicants and against the respondents.
28. The impugned final seniority list in the cadre of Tax Assistants dated 28.10.2022 (Annexure A-1) is set aside.
29. Respondents shall consider and re-cast fresh seniority list in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in case of K. Meghachandra (supra) re-fixing the inter-se seniority of applicants vis-à-vis the private respondents accordingly within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
30. However, keeping in view that as the judgment in K. Meghachandra (supra) has been referred to a Larger Bench by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Hariharan & Ors. vs. Harsh Vardhan Singh Rao & Ors., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1717, we further direct that the fresh seniority list, which shall be re- casted by the respondents as indicated hereinabove terms, shall also be subject to the outcome of the reference.
31. Resultantly, the Original Application is accordingly allowed in above indicated terms.
32. There shall be no order as to costs.
33. As a sequel thereof, pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
34. Registry is directed to upload the order on website forthwith.
(Ajay Pratap Singh) (B. Anand) Member (J) Member (A) /na/