TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1956X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the promotees Under Rule 7(3)(a) and issue pertaining to inter-se-seniority of out of turn promotees and direct recruits have already been finalized by us. Only exercise which is to be undertaken is to place officers of three streams in accordance with the roster as indicated in Appendix-B. All appeals are allowed in following manner: 1) The Division Bench judgment of the High Court so far as it holds that roster is applicable in the determination of seniority of members of superior judicial service is upheld. 2) The judgment of the Division bench of the High Court holding that fifteen promotees Under Rule 7(3)(a) were beyond the quota and shall take position at the bottom of the seniority list is set aside. 3) The seniority list dated 24.12.2014 is set aside. The list of 35 officers arranged as per Roster as indicated above shall be treated as final Seniority list of the officers recruited in the year 2008. - Civil Appeal Nos. 5518-5523 of 2017, Civil Appeal Nos. 10185-10187/2018 (Diary No. 32341 of 2017), Civil Appeal No. 10176 of 2018 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 16772 of 2017), Civil Appeal Nos. 5513, 5509, 5525, 5510, 5515-5517 and 5528-5529 of 2017 - - - D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he respective dates of their confirmation. On 31.12.1976 Rule 12 was amended providing that seniority, inter se, of the members of the Service, shall be determined by the length of continuous service on a post in the Service irrespective of the date of confirmation. 9. On 28.01.1991, Rule 8(2) was amended providing that of the total number of cadre posts, three-fourth shall be manned by promotee Officers and one-fourth by direct recruits. 10. This Court in All India Judges' Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. 2002 (4) SCC 247, on 21.03.2002, after considering Justice Shetty Commission's report had issued various directions regarding recruitment to the Higher Judicial Service in the cadre of District Judges. The directions were issued by this Court directing that recruitment to the Higher Judicial Service i.e. the cadre of District Judges shall be from three streams i.e.: (1)(a) 50 per cent by promotion from amongst the Civil Judges (Senior Division) on the basis of principle of merit-cum-seniority and passing a suitability test; (b) 25 per cent by promotion strictly on the basis of merit through limited competitive examination of Civil Judges ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard to whom posting order dated 08.12.2008 was issued. Fifteen Officers were promoted under 50% quota, eight Officers were promoted under out of turn promotion quota 25%. Twelve direct recruits were appointed vide order dated 08.12.2008. The process of recruitment of all the three streams was thus completed in the same year and Officers of the three streams joined their respective posts in the year 2008 itself although on different dates. The promotees got joining first followed by out of turn promotees and lastly by direct recruits. This Court in All India Judges Association and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., 2010 (15) SCC 170, reduced the out of turn promotion quota from 25% to 10% which was to take effect from 01.01.2011. The High Court initiated the process of fixation of inter se seniority of the officers of two streams in the year 2014. A tentative seniority list was prepared and circulated by the Registrar of the High Court on 25.09.2014 to the members of Superior Judicial Service. Various objections to the list were filed including the objections by direct recruits as well as officers promoted under the out of turn quota. The Judges' Committee submitted a report after ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection in the nature of certiorari quashing the Tentative Seniority List dated 25.09.2014 (Annexure P-1), the Report dated 11.08.2015 (Annexure P-4) and the decision of the Full Court dated 22.12.2015 (Annexure P-5) and consequently directing the official Respondents to frame a fresh seniority list of the Officers belonging to the Punjab Superior Judicial Service having been appointed in the year 2008 in accordance with law and specially by implementing the roster and for the grant of all consequential benefits flowing therefrom viz. continuity of service, antedated promotions, arrears of pay, interest thereon etc.; ii) issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case; iii) exempt the Petitioners from service of the advance notices upon the Respondents; iv) exempting the Petitioners from filing the certified copies of the annexures; v) costs of the petition be awarded to the Petitioner. 14. Another Writ Petition No. 1983 of 2016 was filed by Munish Singal and two others who were direct recruits challenging seniority list dated 24.12.2015. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e High Court held that promotees were in excess, hence, promotions made shall be treated in excess of quota and they shall take seniority on the date post is available in their quota. The High Court further held that the date of recommendation of direct recruits cannot be treated the date for the purpose of seniority. On applicability of roster in determination of seniority, the High Court categorically held that roster shall be applicable in determining the seniority as per Rules, 2007. The vacancies Under Rule 7(1)(b) shall shift to Rule 7(1)(a) only with effect from 01.01.2011. The writ petitions were allowed and operative portion of judgment is contained in paragraph 208 which is to the following effect: 208. For the reasons mentioned above, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned seniority list dated 24.12.2015 is set aside. It is held that: (i) promotion of officers Under Rule 7(3)(a) [Regular promotion] of the 2007 Punjab Rules is held to be beyond quota, hence, ad hoc. They will not be entitled to get benefit of that service for the purpose of seniority; (ii) direct recruits shall not be entitled to be considered as members of the cadre fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect view of the matter. The officers desirous to compete, ought to have approached the High court praying that examination to be held. The High Court did not hold any suitability test for promotion of the officers Under Rule 7(3)(a) for which promotees cannot be made to suffer. The challenge to promotion cannot be allowed to be raised at the time of determination of seniority. The roster provided in Appendix B to the Rules, 2007 is only for the purpose of recruitment and has no application for determination of seniority. Had the competitive examination for out of turn promotees held in February, 2008, promotees would have also appeared and would have succeeded in the examination. The appointment having not made in time, quota Rule is broken down. The promotees having been promoted on regular basis even if they are in excess of quota, their services have to be considered, the appointment of promotees is not an ad hoc appointment, hence, entire service rendered by promotees is to be reckoned for seniority. 21. Shri K.V. Viswanathan submits that assumption that promotees are in excess of their quota is not correct. Rules, 2004 and roster introduced by Rules, 2007 has to be prosp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ges' Association case has to be given effect by the High Court. Rules, 2007 has to be interpreted in the light of the judgment of this Court in All India Judges' Association case, which directions resulted in Amendment Rules, 2004 and Rules, 2007. Out of turn promotees in their writ petitions have prayed for applying the roster for determination of seniority. The High Court although in the body of judgment held that roster is applicable in seniority but in operative portion the said conclusion is not reflected which had rendered the judgment of the High Court erroneous. The roster having been accepted as applicable for purposes of seniority, seniority list has to be drawn as per roster. It is submitted that process of recruitment initiated on 2nd February, 2008 whereas promotions and out of turn promotions were held thereafter. It is submitted that recommendations sent to the Government on the same day but appointment letter for direct recruits were received later which will have no effect on the seniority that is the direct recruits which have to be made as per the roster. Rule 7(4) read with Appendix B of Rules, 2007 makes it clear that appointment has to be made as per r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as required uniform procedure for recruitment and Rules for determination of seniority with the object of achieving a uniformity and a certainty to minimise the inter se seniority dispute as far as possible. Thus, before we proceed to consider the respective submissions of the parties it is pertinent to refer to the judgment of this Court in All India Judges' Association case which is foundation of Service Rules, 2007 and throws light on different aspects of higher judicial service. 28. As noticed above, 1963 Rules contained provisions for filling the post of Superior Judicial Service only by two methods, by promotion from Punjab Service and by direct recruitment. Initially the total number of cadre posts two-third were manned by promotion and one-third direct recruits which was changed on 28.1.1991 as three-fourth by promotions and one-fourth by direct recruits. 29. In different States there were different Rules for recruitment in Judicial Service. Justice Shetty Commission took up the whole breadth and length of Judicial Service, its service conditions, perks and all aspects of the matter. On 21.03.1996 pursuant to direction of this Court, Government of India by a Resol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -seniority. For this purpose, the High Courts should devise and evolve a test in order to ascertain and examine the legal knowledge of those candidates and to assess their continued efficiency with adequate knowledge of case law. The remaining 25 per cent of the posts in the service shall be filled by promotion strictly on the basis of merit through the limited departmental competitive examination for which the qualifying service as a Civil Judge (senior division) should be not less than five years. The High Courts will have to frame a Rule in this regard. 30. In paragraph 28 directions were issued by this Court to the following effect: 28. As a result of the aforesaid, to recapitulate, we direct that recruitment to the High Judicial Service i.e. the cadre of District Judges will be: (1)(a) 50 per cent by promotion from amongst the Civil Judges (Senior Division) on the basis of principle of merit-cum-seniority and passing a suitability test; (b) 25 per cent by promotion strictly on the basis of merit through limited competitive examination of Civil Judges (Senior Division) having not less than five years qualifying service; and (c) 25 per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Courts to suitably amend and promulgate seniority Rules on the basis of the roster principle as approved by this Court in R.K. Sabharwal's case (supra) as early as possible. We hope that as a result thereof, there would be no further dispute in the fixation of seniority. It is obvious that this system can only apply prospectively except where under the relevant Rules seniority is to be determined on the basis of quota and rotational system. The existing relative seniority of the members of the higher judicial service has to be protected but the roster has to be evolved for the future. Appropriate Rules and methods will be adopted by the High Courts and approved by the States, wherever necessary by 31-3-2003. 32. In pursuance of judgment of this Court dated 21.03.2002 Rules, 1963 were amended in 2004 by Punjab Superior Judicial Service (First Amendment) Rules, 2004 where for existing Rules following Rules have been substituted: 8. Recruitment to Service.-Recruitments to the Service shall be made in the following manner: (a) fifty per cent by promotion from amongst the Civil Judges (Senior Division) on the basis of merit-cum-seniority and passing a suita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dicial Branch), shall not be disturbed. (2) The inter se seniority of the out-of-turn promoted officers shall be in the order of merit as is determined by the High Court. (3) The inter se seniority of the direct appointees shall be on the basis of merit as is determined by the High Court: Provided further that an officer, who is promoted on ad hoc basis on a vacant post, belonging to the out-of-turn promotee officers or direct appointees, as the case may be, shall not have any right on the said post and such officer shall not be allowed to claim addition of the period of such ad hoc service towards the Service for the purpose of seniority. 35. Rule 23 dealt with application of the Punjab Civil Services (General and Common Conditions of Service) Rules, 1994 in respect of the matters, which are not specifically provided in these rules. Rule 23 is as follows: 23. Application of the Punjab Civil Services (General and Common Conditions of Service Rules, 1994. -- (1) In respect of the matters, which are not specifically provided in these rules, the members of the Service shall be governed by the Punjab Civil Services (General and Common Conditions of Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recruits were also determined as 21 excluding the officers in position. 14 posts were advertised for direct recruitment. One of the issues raised is as to whether for determination of the quota cadre strength has to be looked into or quota has to be determined on the basis of vacancies by bifurcating vacancies as per respective quota. The issue is no more res integra. In All India Judges Case (supra), this Court in Para 29 has held One of the methods of avoiding any litigation and bringing about certainty in this regard is by specifying quotas in relation to posts and not in relation to the vacancies . A Three Judge Bench of this Court in Srikant Roy and Ors. v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. (2017) 1 SCC 457 while determining question of number of vacancies in respect of limited competitive examination of Jharkhand as in Jharkhand Superior Judicial Service has held that cadre strength is always measured by the number of posts comprising the cadre and the percentage of quota has to be worked out in relation to number of posts which form the cadre and has no relevance to the vacancy that would occur. Following was laid down in Paragraph 24: 24. The High Court has overlooked th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per cent for limited departmental competitive examination and 25 per cent for direct recruits and as far as for direct recruits, earlier 25 per cent was maintained. Thus, the issue was only with regard to quota for promotion on the basis of merit-cum-seniority and of out of turn promotees. This Court in All India Judges case (supra) in Para 29 has clearly directed that the system which was directed to be put in place by this Court vide Paras 27, 28 and 29 was to apply prospectively. This Court had directed that appropriate Rules and methods will be adopted by the High Courts and approved by the States, wherever necessary by 31st March, 2003. Upto 2004, the quota for promotion on the basis of merit-cum-seniority was 75 per cent, the cadre strength as on 13.09.2007 was 89, which was increased on 10.11.2007 as 107. After the amendment of Rules on 15.01.2004, promotion of 10 officers were made. It is mentioned in the Civil Appeal of the High Court that cadre strength of Punjab Superior Judicial Service before 2004 was 88. Thus, in the year 2004, when the cadre strength was 88, 75 per cent posts were to be manned by promotees under merit-cum-seniority, i.e. 66 were to be manned by promo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly the recruitment made from three different streams was well within such determination and cannot be faulted. The promotion of officers Under Rule 7(3)(a) was in accordance with the Rules and there is no question of treating the promotion to be ad hoc promotion nor they can be pushed to the bottom of seniority. The new set of rules, the new scheme of recruitment, new Rules of determination of seniority as brought in place by 2007 Rules, its implementation has to be done with care so as not to defeat any existing right. Mechanical application of the rules, which may result to unjust result has to be avoided to advance the scheme of the new Rules and the object which were delineated by this Court in All India Judges case (supra). While allocating posts to be filled by different streams, cadre strength, officers of particular stream in position, quota of each stream has to be kept in mind. The vacancies existing for recruitment in particular year has not to be mechanically divided at the ratio of 50, 25 and 25 per cent. Issue Nos. 2 and 3: Whether appointment to members of Superior Judicial Service belonging to all three streams have to be made on the basis of roster as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... um-seniority, 25 per cent by promotion on the basis of merit through departmental competitive examination of Civil Judges (Senior Division) and 25 percent of posts shall be filled by direct recruitment. Sub-clause (4), which is relevant provides these posts shall be filled in accordance with the Roster attached as Appendix-B . Part of Appendix-B, which is relevant for the present case is as follows (only part is quoted): APPENDIX 'B' [See Sub-rule (4) of Rule 7] ROSTER ROSTER INDICATING THE MODE OF RECRUITMENT Serial No. Source Rule 1. Officer Promoted on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability 7 (3) (a) 2. Officer promoted on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability 7 (3) (a) 3. Direct Recruit from the Bar 7 (3) (c) 4. Officer promoted through limited competitive examination 7 (3) (b) 5. Officer promoted on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, it should not be considered or construed in isolation. One must have regard to the scheme of the fasciculus of the relevant Rules or Sections in order to determine the true meaning of any one or more of them. An isolated consideration of a provision leads to the risk of some other inter-related provision becoming otiose or devoid of meaning. That makes it necessary to call attention to the very next rule, namely, Rule 8. It provides by Clause 2 that: The seniority of direct recruits vis-a-vis promotees shall be determined in the order of rotation of vacancies between the direct recruits and promotees based on the quotas of vacancies reserved for both categories by Rule 7 provided that the first available vacancy will be filled by a direct recruit and the next two vacancies by promotees and so on. This provision leaves no doubt that the overall scheme of the Rules and the true intendment of the proviso to Rule 7 is that one-third of the substantive posts in the Service must be reserved for direct recruits. Otherwise, there would neither be any occasion nor any justification for rotating vacancies between direct recruits and promotees. Rule 8(2), which deals with fix ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to the post. He shall not be entitled to add period of his ad hoc service to regular service for the purpose of seniority: Provided that the existing Rules shall continue to govern the matters of seniority of the existing members of the Service. 47. It has been pointed out that both Judicial Service Rules, 2007 of Haryana and Punjab Superior Judicial Rules, 2007 were sent by the High Court in the similar fashion, where Punjab Rules have been published by the Government by changing the proposed Rules pertaining to seniority without consultation of the High Court. The High Court in its impugned judgment in Para 181 after noticing the Haryana Rules, 6, 7, 8 and 9 has made following observations: Similar Rules were recommended by the High Court to the State of Punjab for notification but changed at its own level without consultation with High Court. 48. In the present case, we need not enter into the issue as to what was proposed and what changes were made by Government while notifying the rules. The above observation in the impugned judgment clearly indicate that Punjab Haryana High Court has contemplated to implement the direction of this Court in All ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ra 23 of the judgment: 23. The General Principles for determining seniority in the Central Services are shown to have been laid down in an annexure to an Office Memorandum dated 22-12-1959 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs (hereinafter referred to as the OM dated 22-12-1959 ). Para 6 of the annexure, referred to above, laid down the manner of determining inter se seniority between direct recruits and promotees. Para 6 is being extracted hereunder: 6. Relative seniority of direct recruits and promotees.--The relative seniority of direct recruits and of promotees shall be determined according to the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and promotees which shall be based on the quotas of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively in the Department Rules. It is apparent from the above extract of the OM dated 22-12-1959, that the quota between promotees and direct recruits was to be read into the seniority rule. The OM also provided for a definite rotation of seniority points ( rota ) between promotees and direct recruits. The rotation provided for was founded on the concept of rotation of quotas be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recruitment has been initiated during the recruitment year (in which the vacancies have arisen) itself, even if the examination for the said recruitment is held in a subsequent year, and the result is declared in a year later (than the one in which the examination was held), and the selected candidates joined in a further later year (than the one in which the result was declared), the selected candidates will be entitled to be assigned seniority, with reference to the recruitment year (in which the requisition of vacancies was made). The logic and reasoning for the aforesaid conclusion (expressed in the ON dated 2-2-2000) is, if the process of direct recruitment is initiated in the recruitment year itself, the selected candidate(s) cannot be blamed for the administrative delay, in completing the process of selection. 53. In the present case, process for all the three streams was completed in the year 2008 and all the officers of three streams had joined in the same year. The submission that quota rota Rule was broken or seniority will be affected because of joining of one category of officers earlier cannot be accepted. It is also relevant to notice that purpose of statutory Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to their seniority as required by Rule 12(1). After the circulation of tentative seniority list dated 25.09.2014, objections were filed by direct recruits questioning the placement of Parminder Pal Singh and Sukhdev Singh at Serial No. 15 and 16 under the direct quota above other direct recruits. 56. With regard to Parminder Pal Singh and Sukhdev Singh, it was stated by direct recruits that their appointment Under Rule 7(3)(c) was not permissible since they were not advocates at the time of selection of Direct recruits and they were not selected on the basis of the written test and viva-voice under which all direct recruit candidates were subjected. It was submitted that absorption of these officers is an ex gratia absorption in service and as such they cannot be treated senior to the direct recruits. 57. One of the out of turn promotee namely, Arunvir Vashista had staked his claim before the committee. It was submitted that he being senior most officer among the out of turn selected candidates and although he was placed at serial No. 6 as per his merit but he being the only officer who already stood promoted as presiding officer of the Fast Track Court on ad-hoc basis, he wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g in mind the peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases. (f) The candidates who qualify the written examination and obtain consolidated percentage as afore indicated shall be appointed to the post of Additional District Judge in the regular cadre of the State. (g) If, for any reason, vacancies are not available in the regular cadre, we hereby direct the State Governments to create such additional vacancies as may be necessary keeping in view the number of candidates selected. (h) All sitting and/or former FTC Judges who were directly appointed from the Bar and are desirous of taking the examination and interview for regular appointment shall be given age relaxation. No application shall be rejected on the ground of age of the applicant being in excess of the prescribed age. 59. With regard to candidates from any state who were promoted as Fast Track Court Judges from the post of Civil Judge, Senior division, following direction were issued in paragraph 207.13: 207.13. The candidates from any State, who were promoted as FTC Judges from the post of Civil Judge, Senior Division having requisite experience in service, shall be entitled t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld on 10.04.2008. The Government of Punjab appointed both the Officers to Punjab Superior Judicial Service Order dated 24.06.2008. 61. The above report was subsequently approved by full court on the basis of which tentative seniority list was issued. The two officers Parminder Pal Singh and Sukhdev Singh were appointed to Punjab Superior Judicial Service by Order dated 24.06.2008. In the tentative seniority list, they were placed at serial No. 15 and 16 i.e. above the direct recruits. It is relevant to note that the tentative seniority list was prepared by the committee on the basis of continuous length of service. It was probably due to that reason that serial No. 15 and 16, direct recruits were shown above the out of turn promotees and direct recruits. The above two officers who were taken on the regular Cadre of Additional District Judge, after written test and viva-voice test which is almost the same procedure which has been subsequently laid down by this Court in Brij Mohan Lal case dated 19.04.2012(Supra). The above two officers having been included in direct recruitment quota, they have to be clubbed along with the direct recruits. We have already held that for determinin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we come to the claim of Shri Arunvir Vashista Fast Track Court Judge who was selected by out of turn promotion. Shri Arunvir Vashista was appointed as Fast Track Court Judge consequent to promotion of fifteen officers Under Rule 7(3) (a). The appointment and selection committee along with proposing fifteen promotions Under Rule 7(3)(a) has also proposed seven officers to man the Fast Track Courts in which Shri Arunvir Vashista was included. Shri Arunvir Vashista thus occupied the Fast Track Court judge post in the year 2008 itself and participated in the limited departmental competitive examination and secured sixth position on merit. Among the out of turn promotees Shri Arunvir Vashista has been placed at sixth place. 65. Shri Arunvir Vashista in his brief written synopsis does not dispute that seniority is to be fixed by the roster points and irrespective of the fact, as to when a person is recruited. He rightly submits that Rules are subsidiary and subservient to the law. He has also placed reliance on order of this Court dated 28.04.2016 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1022/1989, All India Judges Association and Ors. v. Union of India and others. The Order of this Court dated 28.04.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... promotees has to be in accordance with the merit. His position among the out of turn promotees has thus rightly been shown as serial No. 6 with which no infirmity can be found. We thus conclude that all Fast Track Court judges who were taken into the regular cadre in different streams have been rightly placed in the seniority list amongst their stream to which no exception can be taken. OUR CONCLUSIONS: 68. The tentative seniority list was prepared on the basis of continuous length of service, hence, all promotee officers who had joined on 27th/28th February, 2008 have been shown at serial No. 1 to 14. Parminder Pal Singh and Sukhdev Singh, Fast Track Court Judges from Bar who were appointed in regular cadre w.e.f. 01.08.2008 have been shown at serial No. 15 and 16. From Serial No. 17 to 24 were out of turn promotees in block and thereafter Serial No. 25 to 35, direct recruits were placed in block. The final tentative seniority list has been approved by the committee after considering the objections. It is reflected in its report dated 11.08.2015. Full Court approved the report dated 11.08.2015, hence, final seniority list was issued on 24.12.2015. Final seniority list was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly, to finalize seniority list in this judgment itself. We choose to adopt the second course for two reasons: a) Already period of three years has elapsed when the tentative seniority list was published. Finalisation of seniority as early as possible is essential and necessary for administration of justice. b) There is no dispute regarding inter-se-seniority of the promotees Under Rule 7(3)(a) and issue pertaining to inter-se-seniority of out of turn promotees and direct recruits have already been finalized by us. Only exercise which is to be undertaken is to place officers of three streams in accordance with the roster as indicated in Appendix-B. After placing the officers of three streams, the seniority position as per roster comes as follows: 72. It is further relevant to note that in view of judgment of this Court in (2010) 15 SCC 117, All India Judges Association, quota of 25 percent for out of promotees has been reduced as 10 percent w.e.f. 01.01.2011. The present seniority dispute being related to recruitment held in 2008, the reduction in quota may not be relevant in the present case. 73. In view of foregoing conclusions all appeals are allowed in follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
