TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filling up the vacancies of 48 officers; 24 by direct recruitment through examination and 24 by nominating officers from the existing services to Punjab Civil Services (PCS). Advertisements were issued by the State of Punjab for direct recruitment to the PCS. 4. However, the said requisition was modified in the year 1982 whereby the number of officers to be selected was raised to 80 wherefore a revised advertisement was also issued. The Promotee Officers were brought into the PCS in the year 1984. Appellants, however, were appointed in the year 1986 by direct recruitment with effect from 1985. Seniority list was finalized in 1993 in respect of the officers appointed to PCS from 1976-1985 wherein the direct recruits who joined in 1986 were not included. Seniority list in respect of officers directly recruited and appointed in 1986 was finalized in 1994 and they were placed below the last officer in the seniority list of 1993. 5. Arvinder Singh Bains, the appellant No. 3 herein, along with one Dipinder Singh filed a writ petition (marked as Writ Petition No. 16516 of 1995) before the Punjab Haryana High Court questioning the correctness of the said 1994 seniority list. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r every alternative vacancy shall be filled from amongst candidates borne on Register `B'; (ii) the 2nd, 8th, 14th, 20th, 26th, 32nd, 38th, 44th, 50th, 56th, 62nd, 68th, 74th, 80th, 86th, 92nd, 96th and 100th vacancies shall be filled from amongst the candidates borne on Register A-I; (iii) the 4th, 10th, 16th, 22nd, 28th, 34th, 40th, 46th, 52nd, 58th, 64th, 70th, 76th, 82nd, 88th and 98th vacancies shall be filled from amongst candidates borne on Register A-II; (iv) the 12th, 30th, 42nd, 54th, 66th, 78th and 90th vacancies shall be filled from amongst the Excise and Taxation Officers accepted as candidates on Register A-III; (v) the 18th, 36th, 60th and 84th vacancies shall be filled from amongst the District Development and Panchayat Officers or Block Development and Panchayat Officers accepted as candidates on Register A-III; and (vi) the 6th, 24th, 48th, 72nd and 94th vacancies shall be filled from amongst the candidates on Register `C': 21. Seniority of the members of the service.--The seniority of officers appointed to the service shall be determined in accordance with the order of their appointment to the service; provided that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he law laid down by this Court. Thus, we hold: 1. that the action of the State is contrary to the 1976 Rules; 2. the seniority under the 1976 Rules must be based on a collective interpretation of Rule 18 and Rule 21 of the 1976 Rules; 3. the action of the authorities is negation of Rule 18 of the 1976 Rules in determining the seniority by the impugned order. Since the action is contrary to law laid down by this Court, we have no hesitation in allowing the appeal and grant the relief as prayed for by the appellant. 13. Indisputably, review applications filed by some promotee officers thereagainst was also dismissed by this Court on 17.8.2006. 14. Inter alia, on the premise that the State has failed and/or neglected to the time frame for revising the seniority list, a Contempt Petition marked as Contempt Petition (C) No. 214 of 2006 was filed on or about 15.10.2006. Thereafter, a tentative seniority list was prepared on 15.12.2006. A final seniority list was prepared on 4.4.2007 in terms whereof all the direct recruits (appellants) were placed before the first respondent. 15. On or about 26.4.2007, the State Government forwarded a proposal to the Union P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... direction to the officials Respondent not to appoint the selected candidates from Sr. No. 4 to 9, as IAS against the posts against which the applicant and others are working. 2. Direct the Respondents to grant the benefit of the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Arvinder Singh Bains' case only to the applicant therein, if it is admissible to him, and not to the private respondents who never challenged the seniority of the applicant settled in 1993 and 1994. 19. By an order dated 18.3.2008, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh while issuing notice directed that the promotions made to the I.A.S. would be subject to the final outcome of the said O.A. 20. The first respondent filed a writ petition against the said order before the High Court. The High Court by reason of an Order dated 25.3.2008 granted stay on the reversion of the first respondent although no such prayer was made in the original application. It is the said order which is being impugned herein. 21. Before, however, adverting to the propriety and/or legality of the said order dated 25.3.2008, we may notice that on an application filed by the State Government for vacation of st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on its behalf. The Union Public Service Commission is represented by Ms. Binu Tamta. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties quite at length. As all these appeals are preferred against the interim orders passed by the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh, being orders dated 25.3.2008, 3.4.2008 and 10.4.2008 and having regard to the fact that a large number of contentions have been raised before us, we are of the opinion that the operative portion of the judgment may be pronounced here and now. Detailed reasons therefor, however, would be assigned later on. (1) The appeals are allowed, modifying the impugned orders of the High Court to the following extent: (a) That portion of the impugned orders whereby and whereunder the High Court has stayed the reversion of the writ petitioners, who are respondents in these appeals, shall stand vacated. However, they shall be adjusted against any of the 12 vacancies which are stated to be existing and in respect of which steps are being taken to send requisition to the Union of India for making appointment. The writ petitioners - respondents will be entitled to continue against those vacancies only till app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid purpose, the High Court should have assigned some reasons in support of its order. We need not delve upon the said question in great detail. But it is beyond any cavil of doubt that before passing an interim order, the courts should not only consider prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury but also its effect on public interest also. The public interest demands that the process should be continued. The Rules have been interpreted by this Court in Arvinder Singh Bains (supra), and review petition filed thereagainst had been dismissed. In the said review application, contentions have been raised which are similar to the ones raised by the first respondent in his original application. Furthermore, although this Court dismissed the contempt application by an order dated 20.8.2007 by making certain observations, the same should have been given effect to. We are not unmindful of the fact that in these matters not only the seniority list but also the selection process has been under challenge. But, as noticed hereinbefore, no interim relief qua reversion has been sought for. 29. This Court in M. Gurudas v. Rasaranjan: (2006) 8 SCC 367 opined: 21. While ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of jurisdiction. --Where a court having general jurisdiction and having acquired jurisdiction of the subject- matter has issued an injunction, a court of concurrent jurisdiction will usually refuse to interfere by issuance of a second injunction. There is no established rule of exclusion which would deprive a court of jurisdiction to issue an injunction because of the issuance of an injunction between the same parties appertaining to the same subject-matter, but there is what may properly be termed a judicial comity on the subject. And even where it is a case of one court having refused to grant an injunction, while such refusal does not exclude another coordinate court or Judge from jurisdiction, yet the granting of the injunction by a second Judge may lead to complications and retaliatory action.... x x x 19. A court while exercising its judicial function would ordinarily not pass an order which would make one of the parties to the lis violate a lawful order passed by another court. 33. The impugned interim order clearly violates the aforementioned rule. 34. We, however, need not consider the question as to whether the rosters are different or whether the State ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
