Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10
PETITIONER:
P. C. SETHI & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT17/01/1975
BENCH:
GOSWAMI, P.K.
BENCH:
GOSWAMI, P.K.
BEG, M. HAMEEDULLAH
KRISHNAIYER, V.R.
CITATION:
1975 AIR 2164 1975 SCR (3) 201
1975 SCC (4) 67
ACT:
Constitution of India, Art. 16-Civil Service--Central
Secretariat Service (Reorganisatioin and Reinforcement)
Scheme-Home Ministry circular dated 22nd June, 1949-Whether
subsequent direct recruits can supersede those who are
absorbed in service earlier-Delay and laches.
HEADNOTE:
Petitioners are Assistants in Grade IV Class 11 of the
Central Secretariat Service. Petitioners were appointed as
Assistants during the period 1944-54. The respondent Union
of India appointed a large number of persons as Assistants
by direct recruitment and many of those appointed after the
petitioners have been confirmed in the grade and have since
been promoted to the next higher grade of Section Officer.
In 1948, the Government framed a Scheme known as the Central
Secretariat Service (Reorganisation & Reinforcement) Scheme.
Thereafter instructions for the initial constitution of the
Assistants Grade were issued in March, 1949. Thereafter,
the Ministry of Home Affairs issued Office Memorandum dated
June 22, 1949. dealing with the question of seniority. Para
2 of the office memorandum provided that the rule of
seniority on the basis of length of service should be taken
as a model in framing the rules of seniority for other Ser-
vices. The main question to be determined in the present
petition is whether the office memorandum of June, 1949 is
applicable in determining seniority of the petitioners.
HELD’. Office Memorandum of June 22, 1949 is no bar lo the
Government making separate provision for the mode of
constitution and future maintenance of the service of
Assistants. The classification made in the instructions
cannot be characterised as unreasonable. There is no
discrimination amongst equals nor any arbitrary exercise of
powers by the Government. In the absence of any statutory
rules prior to the Central Secretariat Service Rules 1962 it
was open to Government in exercise of its executive power to
issue administrative instructions with regard to
constitution and reorganisation of the Service as long as
there is no violation of Arts. 14 and 16 of the
Constitution. The instructions of the Government issued
from time to time do not violate any fundamental rights of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 10
the petitioners. In the present petition, the Civil List of
1962 has not been challenged as invalid. Only office
Memorandum of 1971 is challenged. The said Memorandum of
1971 is based on the civil list of 1962. The validity of
which is not specifically challenged in the petition. There
is no infirmity in the Memorandum of 1971 simply because it
is not in conformity with the Memorandum of 22-6-1949.
[207H; 208B-E]
HELD FURTHER : Once the temporary Assistants have been
absorbed in the Service after they are found to be eligible
in accordance with the instructions their claim for
seniority cannot be superseded by the direct recruitment if
appointed after the former’s absorption in the service. It
appears that the quota of direct recruitment was not
enforced and perhaps for good reasons. Administrative in-
structions if not carried into effect for obvious and good
reasons cannot confer a right upon entrants on later
recruitment to supersede the claims of others already
absorbed in the service in accordance with the appropriate
and valid instructions. Nothing has been brought to our
notice which could justify such a wholesale or en bloc
discrimination in favour of those who suddenly enter the
same grade of service by direct recruitment. It could if
permitted be violative of Art. 16 of the Constitution. The
direct recruits who are appointed after the absorption of
the Assistants in conformity with the instructions on the
initial constitution or in the regular temporary
establishment shall rank junior to the latter. [209B; 0]
HELD FURTHER : In view of the entire circumstances of the
case and the hopes held out by the Government from time to
time we are not prepared to dismiss the petition on account
of delay and laches. [210B]
202
JUDGMENT:
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition No. 163 of 1972.
Petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India.
S. S. Javali and B. P. Singh, for the petitioners.
M. N. Phadke and R. N. Sachthey, for respondent No. 1.
P. P. Rao and A. K. Ganguli, for respondent No. 2 & the
interveners.
T. V. S. Narasimhachari, for respondent Nos. 27-32.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Goswami, J.-The petitioners are Assistants in Grade IV
(Class II Non-gazetted) of the Central Secretariat Service
(briefly the Service) and have been working in the various
Ministries of the Government of India. They were appointed
as Assistants during the period between 1944 and 1954.
Their next promotional post is now that of Section Officer
(Class 11, Gazetted). They have raised in this Writ
Petition the question of their seniority and challenged the
validity of the Office Memorandum of 7th September, 1971,
issued by the first Respondent fixing zones for promotion to
the grade of Section Officer on the basis or ranks assigned
in the Civil List of 1962 for the grade of Assistant on the
ground of being in contravention of the Office Memorandum of
June 22, 1949, of the Ministry of Home Affairs. They also
challenge the validity of rule 18(1) of the Central Secre-
tariat Service Rules, 1962 (briefly the Rules) in so far as
it is construed to protect the seniority determined prior to
the commencement of the said Rule in violation of the Office
Memorandum of June 22, 1949. The petitioners allege that
the Government have not followed any consistent principle or
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 10
rule in regulating the seniority of the Assistants. It is
said the first Respondent prepared lists of officers in the
Assistant’s Grade by different combination of
classifications, such as initial constitution, regular
temporary establishments, non-test category, first test
category, second test category, hard cases category, dis-
placed persons, direct recruits, etc. and effected
promotions in utter disregard of the dates of confirmation.
The first Respondent appointed a large number of persons as
Assistants by direct recruitment and many of those appointed
after the petitioners have been confirmed in the grade and
have since been promoted to the next higher grade of Section
Officer. According to the petitioners glaring instance of
arbitrary action is the assignment of en bloc seniority to
persons appointed by direct recruitment in 1956 exceeding
800 in number who have been assigned seniority over all the
petitioners appointed as Assistants long prior thereto.
Such instances were there also in 1958 and 1959.
In retrospect, on July 19, 1948, the Government framed a
scheme known as the Central Secretariat Service (Re-
organisation and Reinforcement) Scheme (briefly the Scheme).
It constituted four grades in the Service, namely, Under
Secretary (Grade 1), Superintendent (Grade II). Assistant
Superintendent (Grade 111) and Assistant (Grade IV). The
Scheme was, however, not implemented until November 1951.
Under para 15 of the Scheme, the authorised permanent
strength of the Service will be fixed by the Ministry of
Home Affairs with the concurrence of the Ministry of
Finance. It was recog-
203
nised therein that "it is essential from the point of view
alike of economy and efficiency that as large a proportion
as possible members of the Service should be recruited on a
permanent basis. A flexible system of fixation of
Authorised Permanent Strength will therefore be
followed .... should be revised once in every three years".
It is also mentioned in the same paragraph that "if as a
result of any such triennial refixation, the Authorised
Permanent Strength is reduced, effect should given to such
reduction by equivalent reduction in the following triennium
of the rate of direct recruitment to the Service and
Promotions from grade to grade." It is also particularly
mentioned in the said paragraph that "the rights of members
appointed to the Service on a permanent basis will not be
prejudiced by any revision of permanent strength, effected
subsequent to such appointment".
Under Paragraph 19 of the Scheme, after the Authorised
Permanent Strength of the Service is determined, the initial
constitution of the Service will be undertaken, and, inter
alia, appointments to Grade IV will be completed within
thirty months. Under para 25 of the Scheme, the mode of
constitution of Grade IV is as follows:-
"Assistants who have already been appointed on
a permanent basis and are not appointed to a
higher grade in the Service as reorganised
will be appointed permanently to Grade IV
first. The remaining vacancies in Grade IV
will be filled by persons who are ’qualified’
in terms of the Ministry of Home Affairs
Office Memorandum No. 23/20/48-NGS, dated the
25th May, 1948. As contemplated in that Memo-
randum two tests will be held by the Federal
Public Service Commission in which the
temporary ’qualifiables’ as defined therein
will be enabled to qualify for permanent
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 10
absorption in Grade IV. In the first of two
tests only qualifiable temporary Assistants
will be allowed to appear. It would then be
considered with reference to the number of
vacancies to be filled as well as the number
of qualifiable candidates remaining whether,
and if so to what extent, the seco
nd test
should be thrown open partially to the
outsiders also".
Paragraph 26 in Part V of the Scheme dealing with future
maintenance of the Service, provides, inter alia, for the
recruitment as follows :-
Permanent vacancies in the Authorised
Permanent Strength of this Grade will be
filled in two ways. One out of every 4
vacancies will be filled, Ministry-wise, by
promotion from the Ministerial Grades below
the rank of Assistant. The remaining 3
vacancies will be pooled for the Central
Secretariat as a whole and filled from among
the successful candidates at the competitive
Ministerial Services Examination held by the
Federal Public Service Commission, The, quali-
fications for admission to- this examination
will continue to be graduates in the age-
groups 20-22 with relaxation of age limit for
the Scheduled Castes".
204
With regard to promotion it is stated in the said paragraph
as follows :-
,,Assistants who have completed 5 years’ but
not more than 10 years’ service in their grade
will be eligible for promotion by selection
based strictly on the result of a limited
competitive test held among Assistants of that
Service group to the rank of Assistant
Superintendent, provided that no Assistant
will be allowed more than three consecutive
chances to compete in this test. Those
Assistants who are not so promoted will also
be eligible in due course for promotion based
on seniority, subject to the rejection of
the unfit, to vacancies in the Grade of
Assistant Superintendent which would be reserved
for being filled by such promotion".
Under para 31 of the Scheme, leave, pension and other
conditions of service will be as applicable at present to
all officers of Central Services, Class I or II, as the case
may be.
After the publication of the Scheme, the Ministry of Home
Affairs on October 25, 1948, circulated an explanatory
memorandum explaining the nature and purpose of the Service.
The Central Secretariat is pithily described therein as "the
workshop of policy" which helps the Government to make and
revise policies and to create, maintain and direct the
organs which execute the policies. The Assistants, we are
concerned with, are the fifth layer at the lowest rung of
the Secretariat Department and are engaged on case work as
distinguished from clerks and typists employed on routine
work in a separate lower service.
It was pointed out that there was a phenomenal expansion in
the Service as would be reflected from the figures, for
example, of Assistants in 1939 at 493 which rose upto 2306
in 1948. This is said to have affected the quality of the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 10
Service which includes a large number of staff employed on a
temporary basis. In 1948 itself the entire number of 2306
Assistants, except 95, were temporary employees. It was
further mentioned in the explanatory note that
"reinforcement is not required at the lowest level, viz.,
the Assistants, Grade. Here what is necessary is the
weeding out of the poor quality material and the improvement
of efficiency of the rest through a permanent tenure and
better training and guidance?.
Then in sequence came the instructions for the initial
constitution of the Assistants’ Grade of the Service on
March 1, 1949. These instructions governed the manner in
which the sanctioned permanent strength of the grade of
Assistants would be filled by existing permanent Assistants
and from various categories of existing temporary employees.
The scheme of the Instructions contains these broad features
(1) All existing permanent Assistants who
are not appointed to higher grades in the
Service will form part of the permanent
strength of the Service.
205
(2) The remaining number of permanent
vacancies in the Grade will be divided among
three categories, namely, (i) The Non Test
Category, (ii) The First Test Category and
(iii) The Second Test Category.
A particular specified number of vacancies will be allotted
to the Non Test Category and the remaining vacancies will be
divided among the First Test Category and the Second Test
Category in the ratio 2 : 1. There is also reservation of a
specific number of vacancies for allotment to Displaced
Government servants. There are five categories of employees
which are included in the Non Test Category and for them
there will be two separate lists, namely, (a) for Displaced
Government servants and (b) for others. Both the lists will
be drawn up ranking the employees in order of seniority
according to their length of service. The employees who are
included in these lists will be eligible for permanent
appointments in accordance with their position in the lists
upto the respective quotas prescribed for them. It will,
therefore, appear that although there may be a large number
of employees included in the lists of Non Test Category, all
may not be absorbed in the permanent vacancies but only
these in order of seniority in the lists upto the sanctioned
strength of the vacancies in the Non Test Category.
,Next comes those Assistants who are eligible to be
considered for permanent appointment to the vacancies
reserved for the First Test Category by qualifying at the
first test to be held by the Federal Public Service
Commission. Here again on the results of the first test
candidates in order of merit upto the number of vacancies
allotted to this category will be confirmed in the grade.
That is to say, although there may be a large number of
temporary Assistants who may have qualified at the first
test, only the candidates in order- of merit upto their
quota in this category will be confirmed. Similarly there
will also be a Second Test Category which will include
candidates who have qualified in the test but only these
candidates in the order of merit upto the number of
vacancies allotted to this Category will be confirmed. The
inter se seniority of the confirmed employees in the Non
Test Category, The First Test Category and The Second Test
Category wilt be according to their length of service.
Paragraph 8 of the instructions which deals with seniority
of
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 10
Assistants in Grade IV as newly constituted, which is even
quoted in the Office Memorandum of June 22, 1949, provides
in substances,follows :-
All existing permanent Assistants who were
confirmed in their posts prior to October 22,
1948, will be arranged in the first instance
Ministry-wise in accordance with the rules in
force then. They will be senior to all others
confirmed thereafter in vacancies arising upto
October 22, 1950. Those who are confirmed
after 1943 in vacancies arising upto October
22, 1950, will be arranged in a single list
for all Ministries and their seniority inter
se will be determined on
206
the basis of their length of continuous
service temporary or permanent in the grade of
Assistant or in an equivalent grade.
After the sanctioned strength of the permanent establishment
has been filled up as set out earlier, the remaining persons
in the Non Test, First Test and Second Test Categories,
because of lack of sanctioned strength in the various
categories, could not be absorbed will form a regular
temporary establishment (R.T.E.). There will be a single
seniority list for such R.T.E. and seniority will be
determined on the basis of the length of continuous service.
The sanctioned strength of the service upto October 22,
1950, will be filled as above. Thereafter a proportion of
future permanent vacancies will be, filled by appointments,
based upon seniority from the list of members of the R.T.E.
The next stage is reached when instructions for the
constitution and maintenance of the regular temporary
establishment of Assistants were issued on August 26, 1952.
The R.T.E. as initially constituted is as follows :-
A list (List A) arranged in order of seniority as Assistants
shall be prepared of all existing Assistants that is those
holding Posts of Assistant as on July 1, 1952 and not
confirmed in Grade IV and of others specifically mentioned
in sub-para (2) (i) of para 3 of the instructions. These
left over from the two Non Test lists mentioned earlier are
entered in one list (List B) in accordance With seniority
with some weightage for Displaced Government servants. The
lists of persons who have qualified in the First and the
Second Test Categories but not confirmed in the service are
referred to as Lists C and D respectively. For the first
time a rotation system is introduced as per sub-para (5) of
these instructions in so far as appointments to the R.T.E.
shall now be made one from each list in serial order from
the top of each list until 1200 persons are chosen. There
is, however, an overall reservation of 121/2% for Scheduled
Castes and 5% for Schedule Tribes. Persons who are neither
permanent members of Grade TV nor members of the R.T.E. of
Assistants are referred to as "Ex-cadre" Assistants. Under
para 4 of these instructions the list of R.T E. prepared in
accordance with para 3(5) shall be the Gradation List of the
R.T.E. at its initial constitution. Para 6 provides that
the persons appointed to the R.T.E. at its initial
constitution shall be senior to these appointed later. The
latter shall rank inter se in the order of their appointment
to the R.T.E. in accordance with para 5(4) of the
instructions. Para 9 provides that all permanent vacancies
in Grade IV not filled by direct recruitment on the results
of competitive examination held by the Union Public Service
Commission shall be filled from the R.T.E. in the order of
the Gradation List subject to certain proviso, the first one
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 10
being that not less than one-fourth of the vacancies shall
be reserved for permanent Clerks.
Then in the wake of these instructions came the Ministry of
Home Affairs’ Office Memorandum of June 22, 1949, dealing
with the subject of "seniority of the displaced Government
servants who have been absorbed temporarily in service under
the Central Government". Paragraph 2 of the said Office
Memorandum may be set out
207
The question of seniority of Assistants in the
Secretariat was recently examined very
carefully in consultation with all the
Ministries and the Federal Public Service
Commission and the decisions reached are
incorporated in para 2 of the Instructions far
the initial constitution of the grade of
Assistants.
This paragraph 8 which is mentioned is the, one which is
quoted earlier from the Instructions of March 1, 1949, which
was expressly intended for the initial constitution of the
Assistant’s Grade of the Central Secretariat Services. The
principle which was adumbrated in the Office Memorandum of
June 22, 1949, is the same as has been earlier mentioned in
paragraph 8 of the Instructions of March 1949.
In paragraph 11 of the counter-affidavit of the Deputy
Secretary to the Government of India, Department of
Personnel, Cabinet Secretariat, it is stated as follows :-
"I say that the statement;that persons who
were appointed long after the petitioners’
appointment as Assistants have been further
promoted in supersession of the claims of the
petitioners is a statement made shorn of its
context. That criticism would have been valid
if with regard to the Assistants of the
Central Secretariat Service the Office
Memorandum of 1949 was applicable under which
length of service was the criterion in the
matter of determining seniority. " with refer-
ence to Annexure ’B’ to the writ petition I am
advised to submit that if the 1949 or 1959
Office Memorandum were applicable to the
petitioners’ case, then Annexure ’B’ w
ould be
valid and this respondent would have no reply
thereto but, unfortunately, for the
petitioner, they being governed by different
principles as regards seniority and art any
rate they being not governed by 1948 or 1959
Office Memorandum, it is only a futile
exercise to find out what would have been
their seniority in the Civil List of 1962 and
1949 Office Memorandum applied to them".
It may be noted that Annexure ’B’ to the Petition is a
statement showing the order of seniority had it been based
on length of service as Assistant.
The principal question that arises for consideration in this
case is whether the Office Memorandum of June 22, 1949, is
applicable in determining seniority of the petitioners.
Para 2 of the Office Memorandum as quoted above clearly
shows that paragraph 8 which contains the rule of seniority
being length of continuous service was in terms applicable
to the initial constitution of the grade of Assistants. The
said rule of seniority should be taken as "the medal in
framing the rules of seniority for other services". This
would go to demonstrate that the Office Memorandum of June
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 10
22, 1949, is no bar to the Government in making separate
provisions for the mode of constitution. and future
maintenance of the service of Assistants. There is, there-
fore, no obligation under the aforesaid Office Memorandum on
the part of the Government to enforce a rule of bald length
of continuous
208
service irrespective of other considerations then the
service was sought to be reorganised and reinforced. As
noticed earlier the service had to be reconstituted and the
temporary Assistants properly observed keeping in view the
question of quality and efficiency as well as at the same
where regard being had to accommodate as large number as
possible for gradual absorption. In doing so we are unable
to hold that the Government has violated the provisions of
articles 14 or 16 of the Constitution. The classification
under the instructions for the constitution of regular
temporary establishment in the manner done cannot be
characterised as unreasonable in view of the object for
which these had to be introduced in reconstituting the
service to ensure security of temporary employees assistant
with efficiency in the Service. There is no discrimination
whatsoever amongst the equals as such nor any arbitrary
exercise of power by the Government. In absence of any
statutory rules prior to the Central Secretariat Rules 1962
it was open to the Government in exercise of its executive
power to issue administrative instructions with regard to
constitution and reorganisation of the Service as long as
there is no violation of article 14 or article 16 of the
Constitution. Subject to what is observed hereafter, as
held above we do not find that the instructions of the
Government made from time to time violated any fundamental
rights of the petitioners. We should also observe that the
various Office Memorandum and instructions including the
Civil list of 1962 have not been challenged as invalid with
the solitary exception of the Office Memorandum of 1971
(Annexure 1). This Office Memorandum again is based on the
Civil List of 1962 the validity of which is not specifically
challenged in this Petition. We, therefore, do not find any
infirmity in the Office Memorandum of 1971 (Annexure 1),
simply because it is not in conformity with the Office
Memorandum of June 22, 1949. Besides, it is stated in the
counter-affidavit of the Deputy Secretary (page 176 of the
record) that "the Office Memorandum of 1971 is no longer
operative. " We have seen that the rule of length of
continuous service has been adopted in the case of different
categories reconstituted in the Service in accordance with
the administrative instructions of the Home Ministry issued
after consultation with the Union Public Service Commission.
The grievance that the said Office Memorandum should have
been applied to all the temporary employees without the
requirement of their being eligible in accordance with other
instructions is without any foundation and cannot be upheld.
A regular set of separate instructions governed the Service
the existence of which cannot be explained if the Office
Memorandum of June 22, 1949, alone were applicable, de hors
these other instructions.
It is further contended that rule 18 of the Rules is invalid
in so far as it protects the seniority of the Assistants
already observed violating the rule of continuous length of
service amongst the entire group as a whole. This argument
is untenable as the rule of continuous length of service
cannot be invoked unless the temporary Assistants are
absorbed in the Service in accordance, with the instructions
which are valid. The entire group of temporary Assistants
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 10
cannot claim seniority by the rule of length of continuous
service without prior compliance with the conditions laid
down under the instructions. Rule 1 8 is, there-
209
lore, not violative of article 14 or article 16 of,the
Constitution on the score of giving effect to the earlier or
other instructions which are not found to be otherwise
objectionable.
That leaves one more question to be resolved, that is, with
reference to the direct recruits. Once the temporary
Assistants have been absorbed in the service after they are
found to be eligible in accordance with the instructions
their claim for seniority cannot be superseded by the direct
recruits if appointed after the former’s absorption in the
Service. This conclusion is based on the following factors
:-
Although the Scheme was made in July 1948 it was not
enforced until November 1951. Even then there was no direct
recruitment until 1956. The reasons for delaying direct
recruitment can be found from a perusal of paragraph 15 of
the 1948 Scheme itself,that "it is essential from the point
of view alike of economy and efficiency that as large a
proportion is possible of the members of the service should
be recruited on a permanent basis. If the Authorised
permanent strength is reduced, effect should be given to
such reduction by equivalent reduction in the following
triennium of the rate of direct recruitment to the Service.
It was, therefore, not the intention of the scheme to
prejudice the seniority of the Assistants after their
absorption in the Service nor such an intention was evident
in the explanatory memorandum annexed to the Office
Memorandum of October 25, 1948. In para 11 of the latter
Memorandum it is unambiguously stated the "reinforcement is
not required at the lowest level, namely., the Assistants’
Grade. Here what is necessary is the: weeding out of the
poor quality material and the improvement of efficiency- of
the rest. through permanent tenure and better training d
guidances. This is also clear from the instructions for the
constitution and maintenance of the regular temporary
establishment of Assistants dated August 26, 1968. Para 9
thereof provides that "all permanent vacancies in Grade IV
not filled by direct recruitment on the results of
Competitive Examination, held by the Union Public Service
Commission shall be filled from the Regular Temporary Estab-
lishment in the order of Gazetted List" subject to certain
provisions with which we are not concerned.
It appears the quota, if any, of direct recruitment Was Dot
enforced and perhaps for good reasons as noted above, the
policy of the Government being different. Administrative
instructions, if not carried into effect for obvious and
good reasons, cannot confer a right upon entrants on later
recruitment to enforce the same to supersede the claims of
others already absorbed in the Service in accordance with
the appropriate and valid instructions. Nothing was brought
to our notice which could justify such a wholesale or en
bloc discrimination in favour of those who suddenly enter
the same grade of service by direct recruitment. It would,
if permitted, be violative of article 16 of the Constitution
which should never be overlooked in such cases.
We are, therefore, clearly of opinion that the direct
recruits who were appointed after the absorption of the
Assistants, in conformity with the instructions of the
initial constitution or in regular temporary
15-L379 Sup. CI/75
210
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 10
establishment shall rank junior to the latter. We,
therefore, direct that the seniority of such Assistants
shall be adjusted and the seniority list corrected
accordingly. This will, however, not affect the cases of
these Assistants who are already promoted and confirmed in a
higher rank prior to the date of this petition.
The learned counsel for the respondents strenuously
contended that the petition may be dismissed on account of
delay and laches. In view of the entire circumstances of
the case and the hopes held out by the Government from time
to time we are not prepared to accede to this submission.
The petitioners also sought to take advantage of what they
described as admission in Government’s affidavits filed in
connection with certain earlier proceedings of similar
nature and other admissions in Parliament on behalf of the
Government. We, are, however, unable to hold that such
admissions, if any, which are mere expression of opinion
limited to the context and also being rather vague hopes,
not specific assurances, are binding on the Government to
create an estoppel.
In the view we have taken the case is distinguishable from
Union of India and Ors. v. M. Ravi Yarma and Ors. etc.(1)
principally relied upon by the petitioners.
In the result the petition is partly allowed only to the
extent that the Assistants who have been absorbed in the
Service in conformity with the instructions will rank senior
to the direct recruits appointed after such absorption. The
seniority list shall be adjusted and corrected accordingly.
This direction will, however, not affect those Assistants
who have already been promoted and confirmed in a higher
rank prior to the date of this petition. In the
circumstances of the case we leave the parties to bear their
own costs.
P.H.P. Petition allowed in part.
1. [1972] 2 S.C.R. 992;
211