Supreme Court of India

CHAIRMAN, PURI GRAMYA BANK AND ANR.versusANANDA CHANDRA DAS AND ORS.

Citation: 1994 INSC 384
Decided: 12 September 1994
Disposal: Disposed off
Bench: K RAMASWAMYN VENKATACHALA

Holding

Seniority of direct recruits is fixed by the ranking assigned by the Selection Board, not by the date of joining or length of service.

Summary

The Supreme Court heard an appeal by the Chairman of Puri Gramya Bank challenging the High Court's order that seniority among directly recruited managers should be based on the date of reporting to duty. The respondents had been selected by a Selection Board which prepared a merit list based on the ranking secured at the time of selection, with the appellant placed at rank No. 9. The Court examined whether seniority should follow the Board's ranking or the actual joining dates. It held that seniority among direct recruits is determined by the ranking fixed by the Selection Board, subject only to adjustments for reservation and roster, and that earlier reporting to duty does not alter that ranking. The High Court's view to the contrary was deemed erroneous, but the appeal was disposed of without altering the order because the primary respondent had died.

Issues considered

Whether seniority of directly recruited employees should be determined by the ranking given by the Selection Board or by the date of reporting to duty.

Subjects

service lawdirect recruitmentsenioritymerit listreservationrosterbanking appointments

Judgment

           CHAIRMAN, PURI GRAMYA BANK AND ANR.                                    A
                                       v.
                 ANANDA CHANDRA DAS AND ORS.

                           SEPTEMBER 12, 1994

          (K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.]                                 B

      Service Law-Direct recruitment-Preparation of panel on the basis of
rank secured-Reckoning of seniorit)-Should be as per rank and not on the
basis of date of repo1ting to duty. .

       In a sdection made by direct recruitment, the Selection Board C
prepared the merit list on the basis of ranking secured at the time of
selection. On the question whether the seniority of the employee should be
reckoned on the basis of date of his joining the duty or according to the
ranking given by the Board
                         -,
                            :
                                                                                  D
        Disposing of the appeal, this Court

      HELD : It is settled law that if more candidates than one are               '
selected, the seniority is as per ranking of the direct recruits subject to the
adjustment of the candidates selected on applying the rule of reservation
and the roster. Mere fortuteous chance of reporting to duty earlier would         E
not alter the ranking given by the Selection Board and the arranged one
as per roster. The High Court erred in its conclusion that the seniority
shall be determined on the basis of the joining reports given by the
condidates and length of service on its basis. [490-C-D]

        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 6308 of                    F
1994.

      From the Judgment and Order dated 4.3.92 of the Orissa High Court
in O.J.C. No. 1007 of 1988.

        R. Mohan for the Appellants.                                              G

        The follo'\Viflg Order of the Court was delivered :

        Leave granted.

        This appeal arises from the Judgment of the High Court of Orissa in       H
                                      489
    490                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1994) SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A . O.J.C. No. 1007/88, dated March 4, 1992. The respondent and others were
  selected by direct recruitment as managers of Rural Bank. His rank was
  No. 9 in the merit list. He was directed to be given seniority on the basis
  of the date of his reporting to duty. It is reported that the first respondent
  is dead. The only question in this ·case is that what shall be the ranking
B among the direct recruits? Is it the qate on which they joined duty or
  according to the ranking given by the selection board? On comparative
  evaluation of the respective merits of the candidates for direct recruitment,
  the Board has prepared the merit list on the basis of the ranking secured
  at the time of the selection. It is settled law that if more than one are
  selected, the seniority is as per ranking of the direct recruits subject to the
C adjustment of the candidates selected on applying the rule of reservation
  and the roster. By mere fortuteous chance of reporting to duty earlier
  would not alter the ranking given by the Selection Board and the arranged
  one as per roster. The High Court, is, therefore, wholly wrong in its
  conclusion that the seniority shall be determined on the basis of the joining
D reports given by the candidates selected for appointment by direct recruit-
  ment and length of service on its basis. The view, therefore, is wrong.
  However, we need not interfere with the order, .since the first respondent
  has died.

           The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

    T.N.A.                                                  Appeal disposed of.

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "service law"Sign in to search