Rules of 2022 Regarding Seniority Based on Merit Apply Prospectively and Cannot Reopen Past Determinations.

The petitioner, a Clerk posted in the Gaya Judgeship, challenged the seniority/gradation list prepared by the respondent authorities

He contended that his seniority should be determined based on his position in the merit list of 1997 rather than his date of joining

The Public Information Officer, Gaya, rejected his representation for correction on April 11, 2025, citing it as a belated request

The petitioner sought a mandamus to apply Clause 13 of the Bihar Civil Court Officers and Staff (Recruitment, Promotion, Transfer and Other Service Conditions) Rules, 2022, to rectify his seniority retrospectively

1. Whether the provision for determining seniority based on merit under Clause 13 of the 2022 Rules can be applied retrospectively to appointments made prior to the notification of the Rules

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a revision of the gradation list that was finalized based on the date of joining under the then-prevailing rules

The Court applied Clause 13 of the Bihar Civil Court Officers and Staff Rules, 2022, which mandates that inter-se seniority for direct recruits be determined by their position in the merit list

It also interpreted Clause 26 (Repeal and Saving), which repealed the previous Rules of 1998, 2001, 2009, and 2017 while saving actions taken under them

Furthermore, the Court relied on Article 367 of the Constitution of India read with the General Clauses Act, 1897, to determine the prospective versus retrospective application of statutes

The Court observed that while the 2022 Rules provide for merit-based seniority, these Rules were notified on April 19, 2022

The Court reasoned that seniority settled prior to this date was governed by the rules then in force, where the date of joining was the primary criterion

Under Clause 26 of the 2022 Rules, "anything done or any action taken" under repealed rules is deemed to be saved

The Court held that unless a statute specifically provides for retroactivity, it must be applied prospectively

Therefore, the petitioner’s demand to apply the 2022 merit-based criterion to an appointment and seniority list finalized decades earlier (1997) constitutes an impermissible retrospective application of the law

The writ petition was disposed of, refusing the relief sought for retrospective correction. However, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to file a fresh representation if any grievance arises regarding seniority determinations made after April 19, 2022