Past service after technical resignation for new recruitment does not count towards eligibility for promotion.

The applicant was selected as an Inspector of Central Excise through the 2006 Combined Graduate Level Examination and joined the Chennai Zone on 11.11.2009.

He subsequently cleared the 2008 examination and was appointed to the Bhubaneswar Zone. He tendered a "technical resignation" from his Chennai post, which was accepted on 15.12.2010 with the stipulation that previous service would count for pensionary benefits and lien under Rule FR 13 and Rule 26(2) of CCS (Pension) Rules.

He joined the Bhubaneswar Zone on 20.12.2010.

In 2022 and 2023, the Department held Review DPCs for promotion to Superintendent, granting benefits to officers who completed six years of service as of 01.04.2016, including those from Inter Commissionerate Transfers (ICT).

The applicant’s request to count his past service in the Chennai Zone to meet the eligibility criteria for promotion was ignored by the respondents.

1. Whether the past service rendered by a government servant in a previous zone prior to a technical resignation for a new appointment can be reckoned for the purpose of seniority and eligibility for promotion in the new cadre.

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to the same benefits as Inter Commissionerate Transfer (ICT) employees regarding the counting of past service for promotion.

Fundamental Rule (FR) 13 regarding the retention of lien.

Rule 26 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, which provides that a technical resignation to take up another government appointment does not entail forfeiture of past service for pensionary purposes.

DoPT OM No. 28020/1/2010-Estt.(C) dated 17.08.2016, which clarifies that while technical resignation protects seniority in a substantive post if a servant rejoins it, it does not automatically allow counting of past service for promotion in a new department.

Amit Singh v. Ravindra Nath Pandey (2022) to establish that the date of joining a particular post is the standard criterion for seniority.

Balco Employees’ Union v. Union of India (2002) regarding the limited scope of judicial review over government policy decisions.

The Tribunal reasoned that the applicant joined the Bhubaneswar Zone as a fresh recruit following his selection under the 2008 notification.

While his technical resignation protected his pensionary benefits and past service for specific purposes under Rule 26(2) and FR 13, there is no statutory rule or executive instruction providing for the carry-forward of service for seniority or promotional eligibility in a new cadre.

The Tribunal found the applicant’s reliance on DoPT OM dated 17.08.2016 misplaced, noting that paragraph 2.6 of the OM actually restricts the counting of service for promotion when moving between departments.

The Tribunal distinguished the applicant's case from ICT employees, stating they operate under different rules and footings.

Since the applicant did not challenge the conditions of his resignation acceptance in 2010 or the 2016 seniority list, his claim for retrospective counting of service was deemed unsustainable and potentially prejudicial to other officers in the Bhubaneswar cadre.

The OA was dismissed, clarifying that in the absence of specific statutory rules, seniority and promotion eligibility are determined from the date of joining the new cadre. No costs were awarded.