Seniority follows the date of appointment and cannot be antedated by retrospectively challenging the validity of seniors' training.

The applicant, appointed as a Constable in the India Reserve Battalion (IRBn) in 2002, was promoted to Head Constable (General Duty) on 07.10.2016

Private respondents (Nos. 7-11) were promoted to the same rank between 2008 and 2010 after passing departmental tests in which the applicant had participated but failed in 2008

In 2018, the respondents published a seniority list placing the applicant at Sl. No. 83, significantly below the private respondents

The applicant challenged this placement, contending that the private respondents’ promotions were invalid because they allegedly failed to complete the mandatory "Lower School Course" at an authorized training institute, claiming the Recruit Training Centre (RTC) at Port Blair lacked the necessary infrastructure or authorization until 2010/2015

He relied on RTI responses from the administration to support his claim that the training provided to the private respondents was insufficient under the rules

1. Whether the promotional training (Lower School Course) undergone by the private respondents at the Recruit Training Centre, Port Blair, in 2008-2009 was valid and compliant with the relevant Standing Orders

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to a seniority position (Sl. No. 4) above the private respondents who were promoted to the cadre approximately eight years prior to him

3. Whether the challenge to the seniority list and the underlying 2008 promotion orders is barred by the law of limitation and the principle of estoppel

The court applied the A & N Police, India Reserve Battalion, (Group 'C' Posts) Recruitment Rules, 2002 (and 2016 amendments) alongside Standing Order No. 193 dated 14.03.2008, which prescribed that Constables must successfully complete a "lower school course" as prescribed by the competent authority to be eligible for promotion

It further relied on the seniority principles established in Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association v. State of Maharashtra (1990) 2 SCC 715, which holds that seniority is reckoned from the date of continuous officiation and cannot be antedated to a period when the employee was not in the cadre

The court also considered Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 regarding the limitation period for challenging administrative orders

DoP&T Office Memorandum No. 22011/7/86-Estt.(D) dated 03.07.1986 regarding the fixation of inter-se seniority

The Tribunal found that Standing Order 193 did not mandate that the "lower school course" be conducted at a specific institute or one with specialized infrastructure; it merely required completion of a course "as prescribed by the competent authority"

Evidence confirmed that the private respondents completed a three-month course at RTC Port Blair, which the competent authority deemed sufficient at that time

The Tribunal rejected the applicant's interpretation of RTI replies, noting that the "upgradation" of the RTC to a Police Training School (PTS) in 2010 did not imply that the RTC was incompetent to provide promotional training previously

Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the applicant himself had undergone training at a Recruit Training Centre (RTC CRPF Rajgir) in 2016, undermining his own argument that only a PTS could impart such training

Legally, the applicant could not claim seniority from a date prior to his actual induction into the cadre (2016), and his failure to challenge the 2008 promotion orders for over a decade rendered the current O.A. a prohibited collateral attack barred by limitation and the principle of estoppel, especially since he had participated in and failed the 2008 selection process

The court concluded that the private respondents had fulfilled the training requirements of the time and that the applicant's reliance on RTI inferences was erroneous and insufficient to displace settled seniority

The impugned seniority list and the orders rejecting the applicant's representation were upheld as legally sound