Quota (percentage) for promotions to be worked out on roster points, not post-based vacancies.

The applicant, an Inspector of Posts (IP) promoted on 13.09.2004, became eligible for promotion to PS Group 'B' cadre under the 75% seniority quota by 13.09.2012.

Respondent No. 1 issued a notification on 28.09.2020 for a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) on 08.11.2020 to fill vacancies in PS Group 'B' for the years 2017-18 (no vacancy), 2018, 2019, and 2020; this notification was later cancelled on 13.10.2020.

An identical notification was re-issued on 20.10.2020 for an LDCE on 29.11.2020 for the same vacancies.

The applicant filed the Original Application (O.A.), challenging the method of calculating vacancies for the LDCE, arguing it was not in conformity with the Recruitment Rules, 1993, and disproportionately increased the LDCE quota, thereby adversely affecting promotion chances via the seniority channel (DPC).

Whether the method of calculating vacancies for the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE) for promotion to PS Group 'B' cadre is in conformity with the Recruitment Rules, 1993, and established legal principles.

Whether the respondents should be directed to reassess vacancies for both the 75% seniority (DPC) quota and 25% LDCE quota separately, year-wise from 2017 onwards, and fill them as per post roster in consonance with the Department of Posts, Postal Service Group B Recruitment (Amendment) Rules, 1993.

The court primarily applied the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Dr. R.N. Bhatnagar & Anr. (CWP No. 5893/1997) dated 18.12.1998, which states that the quota of percentage for departmental promotees and direct recruits must be worked out based on roster points, considering vacancies that arise at a given time, irrespective of whether the vacancy was created by a direct recruit or a promotee.

This principle was followed by the Ernakulam Bench in Shri Swaraj Nair vs. Union of India & Ors. (O.A No. 180/00194/2023) dated 28.11.2025.

The DoP&T O.M. dated 19.01.2007, mandating modifications to Recruitment Rules in line with revised policy, was also considered.

Additionally, the Department of Posts, Postal Service Group B Recruitment (Amendment) Rules, 1993, which establish the 75% seniority quota and 25% LDCE quota, is central to the dispute.

The Tribunal noted that the issue of vacancy calculation for PS Group 'B' cadre had been extensively dealt with by the Supreme Court in Dr. R.N. Bhatnagar, supra, which held that quotas should be worked out on roster points based on vacancies arising at a given time, not specific to the type of incumbent who vacated the post.

This interpretation was mandated for all government departments by DoP&T O.M. dated 19.01.2007.

The Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal, in O.A No. 554/2013, had previously directed recalculation of vacancies in line with Dr. R.N. Bhatnagar, which was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court of Hyderabad despite concerns about potential imbalance between promotion streams.

The High Court's decision was subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP No. 24725/2017, where it directed that future vacancies be adjusted in accordance with the judgment, though past promotions would not be disturbed.

Therefore, the Ernakulam Bench in Shri Swaraj Nair, supra, in an identical matter, struck down a similar notification by observing that adjusting all vacancies in the DPC quota violated the principle of calculating 25% LDCE quota on a vacancy basis, not post-based.

The present O.A. involved the same issue, specifically para No. 7 of the impugned notification (Annexure-A10) regarding LDCE vacancies.

Consequently, the O.A. was disposed of in terms of the directions given in Shri Swaraj Nair, supra.

This implies that Annexure A-10 (the notification dated 20.10.2020) is quashed, and the respondents are directed to reassess vacancies of both 75% seniority (DPC) quota and 25% LDCE quota separately year-wise from 2017 onwards, filling them as per post roster in consonance with the Recruitment Rules, 1993, and strictly adhere to these quotas for future selections.

The respondents are required to comply with these directions within three months from the receipt of the order.

There was no order as to costs.