PETITIONER: SCIENTIFIC ADVISOR TO RAKSHA MANTRI & ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: V. M. JOSEPH DATE OF JUDGMENT: 14/01/1998 BENCH: S. SAGHIR AHMAD, D.P. WADHWA ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J.
The respondent was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk
on November 15, 1969 in the Ministry of Defence.
Subsequently, in the same Department, he was appointed as a
Store Keeper on 27th April, 1971 in the Central Ordnance
Depot, Pune. He got the status of quasi permanent on 27th
April, 1974 and became permanent with effect from 1st May,
1974. The respondent made a request for his transfer as a
Store Keeper in the Naval Physical Oceanographic
Laboratory(NPOL), Cochin, which was accepted on
compassionate ground an on 6th June, 1977, he was
transferred to that post, but was placed at the bottom of
the seniority list of store Keepers there. on 22nd August,
1980, the respondent was promoted to the post of Senior
Store Keeper.
On 15th July, 1980, a new post of Senior Store Keeper,
Grade-I was created as an intermediate grade between the
posts of Senior Store Keeper and Store Superintendent. One
A.K. Anujan, who was the immediate senior of the respondent
in the Grade of Senior Store Keeper was promoted to this
intermediate post of Senior Store keeper, Grade- I on 31st
August, 1982. The respondent raised a claim that he should
have been promoted as Senior Store Keeper on 31st January,
1978 instead of 22nd February, 1980 and should have been
further promoted to the post of Senior Store Keeper, Grade-
I, on 31st August, 1982 along with his next senior A.K.
Anujan. When this claim was not entertained, the respondent
approached the Kerala High Court by a Writ Petition (No.
O.P. 10013 of 1982-J) which was allowed on 30.7.85 and a
direction was issued to the present appellants to consider
the claim of the respondent for ante-dating his promotion on
ad hoc basis by applying the same rules and principles on
which, his immediate senior, A.K. Anujan, was promoted to
the post of Senior Store Keeper, Grade-I.
In pursurance of the above judgment, the case of the
respondent was considered by the Review Departmental
Promotion Committee on 15th October, 1985, which was the
opinion that, since the respondent had completed 3 years of
regular service as Store keeper commencing from 6th June,
14977, only on 7th June, 1980, he could not be promoted as
Store Keeper earlier than 1980. With regard to his promotion
to the post of Senior Store Keeper, Grade-I, the
Departmental Promotion Committee was of the view that since
under the Recruitment Rules, the respondent had completed 3
years of regular service as Senior Store Keeper only on 23rd
August, 1983, the respondent could not be considered for
that post as that post had, in the meantime, been taken out
of the purview of the Departmental Promotion Committee and
the Recruitment and Promotion Rules with regard to that post
had ceased to exist with effect from 7th November, 1981.
On the basis of the decision of the Departmental
Promotion Committee, the order dated 30th October, 1985 was
passed by the appellants, which was challenged by the
respondent before the Central Administrative Tribunal,
madras Bench, which by its judgment dated 23rd February,
1988, has allowed the claim petition and issued the
following directions:-
” (a) The applicant’s service as
Store Keeper at Pune at least from
1.5.1974 when he was made a
permanent Store Keeper should be
reckoned as qualifying service for
the purpose of eligibility for
promotion as Senior Store Keeper at
NPOL, Cochin.
(b) The Review DPC should consider
the applicant for ad-hoc of regular
promotion as the case may be
against ad-hoc/regular vacancies
between 31.1.78 and 22.8.80.
(c) On the basis of the
recommendations of the Review DPC
III, if any, the applicant should
be promoted as SSK either on ad-
hoc or on regular basis by ante-
dating his promotion from 22.8.80.
(d) The respondents should identify
the un-filled posts of SSK-I from
1982 to date and consider the
applicant for promotion as SSK-I
with effect from the date he can be
deemed to have put in three years
of regular service as SSK either
from 22.8.80 or on earlier date
with effect from which the Review
DPC recommends his name for regular
promotion as per promotion as per
(b) above.”
From the facts set out above, it will be seen that
promotion was denied to the respondent on the post of Senior
Store keeper on the ground that he had completed 3 years of
regular service as Store keeper on 7th June, 1980 and ,
therefore, he could not be promoted earlier than 1980. In
coming to this conclusion, the appellants excluded the
period of service rendered by the respondent in the Central
Ordnance Depot, Pune, as a Store Keeper for the period from
27th April, 1971 to 6th June, 1977. The appellants
contended that, since the respondent had been transferred on
compassionate ground, on his own request to the post of
Store Keeper at Cochin and was placed at the bottom of the
Seniority list, the period of 3 years of regular service can
be treated to commence only from the date on which he was
transferred to Cochin. This is obviously fallacious inasmuch
as the respondent had already acquired the status of a
permanent employee at Pune where he had rendered more than 3
years of service as a Store Keeper. Even if an employee is
transferred at his own request, from one place to another,
on the same post, the period of service rendered by him at
the earlier place where he held a permanent post and had
acquired permanent status, cannot be excluded from
consideration for determining his eligibility for promotion,
though he may have been placed at the bottom of the
seniority list at the transferred place. Eligibility for
promotion cannot be confused with seniority as they are two
different and distinct factors.
This Court in Union of India & Ors. vs. C.N. Ponnappan,
AIR 1996 SC 764= 1996(1) SCC 524, has held that, where an
employee is transferred from one unit to another on
compassionate ground and is placed at the bottom of the
seniority list, the service rendered by him at the earlier
place from where he has been transferred, being regular
service has to be counted towards experience and eligibility
for promotion.
In view of this decision, with which we respectfully
agree, the direction of the Tribunal that the respondent may
be promoted to the post of Senior Store Keeper from an
earlier date and the further direction concerning
respondent’s promotion to the post of Senior Store Keeper,
Grade-I, do not suffer from any infirmity. That being so,
the appeal has no merits and is accordingly dismissed
without, however, any order as to costs.