Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
BALWANT SINGH & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 22/04/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (5) 633 1996 SCALE (4)448
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel on both sides.
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of
the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana
made on July 14, 1995 in writ petition No.3200/95. The
admitted position is that on August 8, 1971, the Haryana
Subordinate Service Selection Board advertised for selection
of the candidates for Family Welfare Extension Educators and
Family Planning Welfare Educators in the Health Department
of the State of Haryana. On June 7, 1972, a list of 45
candidates was prepared on the basis of merit secured by
them in the selection. It would appear that ad hoc
appointees approached the High Court and filed W.P.
No.2122/72 and obtained status quo on June 13, 1972. The
writ petition came to be disposed of on November 20, 1981.
Thereafter, the letters of appointment were given to the
selected candidates and the candidates came to be appointed
and joined duties on various dates between September 30,
1985 and December 23, 1586. The gradation of seniority was
done in 1994. The seniority of respondents has been
determined with effect from their dates of actual joining in
1985-86. As said earlier, the High Court allowed the writ
petition and declared them to be seniors on par with those
who were selected and whom letters of appointment were
offered in 1972.
The question, therefore, is: whether the respondents
are entitled to seniority from 7th June, 1972 as per the
gradation list prepared by the Selection Board? Normally,
the seniority of the candidates who are selected by the
direct recruitment would be determined with reference to the
merit list prepared by the Selection Board. But,
unfortunately, in this case, they could not join the service
due to the pendency of the writ petition. The respondents
themselves have to be blamed for the laches since they did
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
not take any action, namely, impleading themselves in the
pending writ petition nor filed any independent writ
petition claiming for their appointment. After the dismissal
of the writ petition, letters of appointment came to be
issued in 1985 and they joined the service. It is settled
law that the seniority of the candidates has to be reckoned
from the date on which they joined the service and started
discharging the duties of the post to which they came to be
appointed. In that view, since the respondents joined the
service in 1985-86, seniority cannot be given with
retrospective effect from the date of the selection to the
candidates appointed from the list of merit prepared by the
Selection Board.
The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.