Honble Punjab And Haryana High Court At ... vs State Of Punjab

9. On   28.01.1991,   Rule   8(2)   was   amended   providing   that   of the total number of cadre posts, three­fourth shall be manned by promotee Officers and one­fourth by direct recruits.

The cadre strength of  Punjab Superior Judicial Service before 2007 comprised of 88 posts. The High Court on 14.10.2004 had made   10   promotions   as   per   unamended   Rules   on   10   vacancies which   were   existing   since   prior   to   amendment   of   Rules   on 15.01.2004. On 31.08.2007, total cadre strength was 89, which was   increased   to   107   as   on   11.10.2007.   The   process   for recruitment   of   direct   recruits   under   Rule   7(3)(c)   of   Rules, 2007   was   initiated   on   02.02.2008   with   the   publication   of advertisement. The promotions under 50% quota on the basis of merit­cum­seniority   was   affected   on   18.02.2008.   The competitive   test   for   limited   departmental   competitive examination   was   held   on   18.05.2008   for   which   process   was initiated on 23.04.2008 by issuance of letter via e­mail. Full Court   on   25.07.2008   approved   the   recommendations   both   for direct recruitment and out of turn promotion, by two separate letters i.e. letter No.628 dated 29.07.2008 the recommendation of   direct   recruitment   and   by   letter   No.629   dated   29.07.2008 recommendation   for   out   of   turn   promotion   were   sent   to   the Government.   The   appointment   letters   in   reference   to   limited competitive   examination   were   received   earlier   then   those   of 6 direct   recruits.   On   14.08.2008,   Governor   of   Punjab   issued Office Order whereby eight Officers were promoted under out of turn   quota,   posting   with   regard   to   whom   was   issued   on 22.10.2008.   The   Governor   of   Punjab   had   issued   letter   for direct   recruits   on   28.11.2008   with   regard   to   whom   posting order   dated   08.12.2008   was   issued.   Fifteen   Officers   were promoted under 50% quota, eight Officers were promoted under out of turn promotion quota 25%. Twelve direct recruits were appointed   vide   order   dated   08.12.2008.   The   process   of recruitment of all the three streams was thus completed in the same   year   and   Officers   of   the   three   streams     joined   their respective posts in the year 2008 itself although on different dates. The promotees got joining first followed by out of turn promotees   and   lastly   by   direct   recruits.   This   Court   in  All India   Judges   Association   and   Ors.   vs.   Union   of   India   and Ors.,   2010   (15)   SCC   170,  reduced   the   out   of   turn   promotion quota   from   25%   to   10%   which   was   to   take   effect   from 01.01.2011. The High Court initiated the process of fixation of inter se seniority of the officers of two streams in the year   2014.   A   tentative   seniority   list   was   prepared   and circulated by the Registrar of the High Court on 25.09.2014 to the members of Superior Judicial Service. Various objections to   the   list   were   filed   including   the   objections   by   direct 7 recruits as well as officers promoted under the out of turn quota.   The   Judges'   Committee   submitted   a   report   after considering   the   objections   recommending   that   tentative seniority list determined does not require any modification or alteration and the same may be finalised. The report of the Committee   was   accepted   by   Full   Court   on   22.12.2015.   A notification dated 24.12.2015 was issued publishing the inter se   seniority   of   the   members   of   Punjab   Superior   Judicial Service, promoted, appointed, absorbed in the year 2008. From serial   Nos.1   to   14   in   the   list   were   the   promotee   Officers, from   serial  Nos.15   and   16   were   direct   recruits,  from   serial Nos.17   to   24   were   promotee   officers   through   limited departmental   examination   and   from   serial   Nos.25   to   35   were direct recruits.

iv) To any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble   Court   deem   fit   and   proper   keeping   in   view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice;

ii)   issue   any   other   appropriate   writ,   order   or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper   in   the   peculiar   facts   and   circumstances   of the case;

(c) Inter se seniority of the direct recruits to the   Service   under   rule   6(c)   shall   be   on   the basis   of   merit   determined   by   the   Selection Committee of the High Court at the time of the recruitment.

examination or selection.

55.  The  officers,   under  out  of   turn  promotions   quota,   whose names were mentioned at Serial No.17 to 24 under Rule 7(3)(b) were arranged according to their merit as disclosed in limited Departmental   Competitive   Examination.   Two   Fast   Track   Court Judges   who   were   included   against   available   posts   in   direct recruit quota were shown above the direct recruits. In so far inter­se­seniority   amongst   the   promotee   officers   promoted under Rule 7(3)(a) is concerned, there is no issue. All have been arranged according to their seniority as required by Rule 12(1). After the circulation of tentative seniority list dated 25.09.2014,   objections   were   filed   by   direct   recruits questioning the placement of Parminder Pal Singh and Sukhdev Singh   at   Serial   No.15   and   16   under   the   direct   quota   above other direct recruits.

(ii)   viva   voice   and   (iii)   ACRs.   As   per   the merit list, the names of Parminder Pal Singh and   Sukhdev   Singh   were   recommended   for absorption in the regular cadre of Additional District   &   Sessions   Judge   in   the   State   of Punjab.   These   recommendations   were   approved by   the   Full   Court   in   its   meeting   held   on 10.04.2008.   The   Government   of   Punjab appointed   both   the   Officers   to   Punjab Superior   Judicial   Service   Order   dated 24.06.2008.””

61.  The above report was subsequently approved by full court on the basis of which tentative seniority list was issued. The two   officers   Parminder   Pal   Singh   and   Sukhdev   Singh   were 53 appointed to Punjab Superior Judicial Service by Order dated 24.06.2008. In the tentative seniority list, they were placed at serial no.15 and 16 i.e. above the direct recruits. It is relevant   to   note   that   the   tentative   seniority   list   was prepared by the committee on the basis of continuous length of service. It was probably due to that reason that serial no. 15 and   16,   direct   recruits   were   shown   above   the   out   of   turn promotees and direct recruits. The above two officers who were taken on the regular Cadre of Additional District Judge, after written   test   and   viva­voice   test   which   is   almost   the   same procedure which has been subsequently laid down by this Court in Brij Mohan Lal case dated 19.04.2012(Supra). The above two officers   having   been   included   in   direct   recruitment   quota, they   have   to   be   clubbed   along   with   the   direct   recruits.   We have   already   held   that   for   determining   the   seniority,   the roster   is   applicable.   The   objection   of   direct   recruits   that they cannot be included in the quota meant for direct recruits since   they   have   not   undergone   the   same   written   test   and viva­voice, which has been undertaken by the direct recruits, thus, cannot be accepted.

68. The tentative seniority list was prepared on the basis of continuous length of service, hence, all promotee officers who had   joined   on   27th/28th  February,   2008   have   been   shown   at serial no.1 to 14. Parminder Pal Singh and Sukhdev Singh, Fast Track   Court   Judges   from   Bar   who   were   appointed   in   regular cadre   w.e.f.   01.08.2008  have   been   shown  at   serial   no.15  and

69. The   Writ   Petitions   were   allowed   by   Division   Bench.   In accordance with the judgment of the Division Bench only change in   the   seniority   list   was   to   displace   the   promotees   from serial no.1 to 14 and to place it in the seniority list below direct recruits. The division bench judgment of the High Court is under challenge before us.

2) The promotion of fifteen officers cannot be said to be ad­hoc nor they can be directed to be put  at the bottom of the seniority list.

5) Rule 7(4) read with Appendix­B has to be read in the light of direction of this Court in All India’s case and harmonious   construction   of   the   rule   clearly   indicates that roster which has been expressly made applicable for filling   the   post   of   all   the   three   streams   shall   be applicable while determining the seniority. Reliefs: ­

71.  In view of foregoing discussion, the seniority list dated 24.12.2015   is   to   be   set   aside.   After   setting   aside   the seniority list, two courses are open. Firstly, to remit this matter to the High Court again to re­cast the seniority list as per our direction and secondly, to finalize seniority list 61 in this judgment itself. We choose to adopt the second course for two reasons:

2) The judgment of the Division bench of the High Court holding   that   fifteen   promotees   under   Rule   7(3)(a)   were beyond the quota and shall take position at the bottom of the seniority list is set aside.

3) The seniority list dated 24.12.2014 is set aside. The list of 35 officers arranged as per Roster as indicated above   shall   be   treated   as   final   Seniority   list   of   the officers recruited in the year 2008.

74. The parties shall bear their own cost.