1993 (3) TMI 353 - SC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Date of seniority determination for the respondent.
2. Legality of the ad hoc appointment and subsequent regularization.
3. Applicability of Karnataka Civil Services Rules and relevant precedents.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Date of Seniority Determination for the Respondent:
The primary issue was whether the seniority of the respondent, who was initially appointed as an Inspector of Excise (Junior) on January 17, 1968, should be counted from the date of his initial appointment or from the date of his regularization on October 26, 1971. The respondent contended that his seniority should be counted from the initial appointment date, whereas the appellants argued that it should be counted from the date of regularization.

2. Legality of the Ad Hoc Appointment and Subsequent Regularization:
The respondent was appointed through Employment Exchange as a local candidate on an ad hoc basis, as per Government Order No. HD 154 EDC 67 dated August 31, 1967. This order allowed for temporary appointments to fill vacancies until regular appointments could be made through the Public Service Commission. The respondent's appointment was regularized under the Mysore State Civil Services (Direct Recruitment to Class III posts) (Special) Rules 1970, effective from October 26, 1971. The special recruitment rules were framed under Article 309 of the Constitution to regularize the services of local candidates who had been appointed on an ad hoc basis.

3. Applicability of Karnataka Civil Services Rules and Relevant Precedents:
The Karnataka State Civil Services (Direct Recruitment to Class III posts) (Special) Rules 1970 define a 'local candidate' and specify the conditions under which such candidates can be regularized. Rule 6 of these rules states that the service rendered by a candidate after regularization shall count for seniority purposes. The Karnataka Government Servants (Seniority) Rules 1957, particularly Rule 1-A, were also considered, which exclude ad hoc appointments from seniority calculations unless regularized. The Supreme Court's decisions in the Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association and Masood Akhtar Khan cases were cited, establishing that ad hoc service cannot be counted for seniority unless the initial appointment was regular and according to rules.

Judgment Summary:

The Supreme Court granted leave and examined the issue of seniority. The respondent's initial appointment in 1968 was ad hoc and not in accordance with the regular recruitment rules. The regularization in 1971 was made possible by the special recruitment rules of 1970. The Court held that the respondent's seniority should be counted from the date of regularization (October 26, 1971), not from the initial ad hoc appointment date. The Court found that the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court erred in its judgment by not considering the ad hoc nature of the initial appointment and the relevant legal precedents. The decision of the Single Bench, which dismissed the writ petition and upheld the seniority list starting from the date of regularization, was affirmed. The appeal was allowed, and the Division Bench's judgment was set aside, with no order as to costs.