Holding

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court order and remanded the matter, directing the High Court to decide in accordance with the later ruling that overruled the Suresh Chandra precedent.

Summary

The petitioners, senior forest officers, sought seniority and all consequential benefits from the year of their allotment by the State Public Service Commission, relying on the decision in In Re: Suresh Chandra Sharma (2002). The Uttarakhand High Court allowed the writ petition, applying the Suresh Chandra rule that incumbents are entitled to such seniority. The State of Uttarakhand appealed, contending that the Suresh Chandra decision had been overruled by the Supreme Court in Uttaranchal Forest Rangers Association v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2006). The Supreme Court held that since the precedent relied upon by the High Court was no longer good law, the High Court order must be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration in line with the later decision. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed, the order was vacated, and the case was sent back to the High Court to decide afresh.

Issues considered

Whether an incumbent forest officer is entitled to seniority and related benefits from the year of allotment by the State Public Service Commission as per the Suresh Chandra decision.
Effect of the overruling of Suresh Chandra by the later judgment in Uttaranchal Forest Rangers Association v. State of Uttar Pradesh on the High Court's order.

Subjects

senioritypublic service commissionservice lawwrit petitionspecial leave petitionprecedent overrulingremand

Judgment

' [2009] 15 ·(ADDL.) S.C.R 933
'i

STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANR A
. ~-' .. v.
RAJENDRA SINGH ARYA AND ANR
., (Civil Appeal No. 7597 of 2009)

" NOVEMBER 16, 2009
B
~ [TA~UN CHATTERJEE AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.]
i
' ,1•_,
i-
Servi9e law: Seniority - Writ petition claiming seniority
~
, ,.. wit/} all consequential benefits from year of allotment by the
..-
Public Service Commission --' By in]pugned order claim
al/cwed by High Court relying upon the decision of another c
High Court - On appeal by State, held: The decision on the
basis of which impugned order was passed has already been
overruled - In view of that, the ~mpugned order is set aside and
matter is remitted to High Court to decide afresh.
D
In Re: .~uresh Chandra Sharma and An,r. v. State of
~
'
j Uttaranchal andOrs. (2002) 1 UPLBEC 18; Uttaranchal
t
Forest Rangers Association(Direct Recruits) and Ors. v State
of.Uttar Pradesti'and'Ors. (2006) 10 SCC 346, referred to .
.:Y
Case law refererice : . E

(2002) 1 UPLBEC 18 referred to Para 2

(2006) 1o sec 346 referred to Para 6
#..
CIVIL AP PELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7597 F
of 2009.

From the Judgment & Order dated 19.8.2006 of the High
Court of Uttaranchal at Nainital in Writ Petitioner No. 258 (SB)
of 2006. G

Su nil Kumar Singh, Anuvrat Sharma for the Appellants.
" :.(

M.N. Krishnamani Avtar Singh, Raj Siogh Rana, for the

933 H
934 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

TARUN CHATTERJEE, J. 1. Leave granted.

B 2. This appeal by Special Leave arises from the judgment
and final order dated 19th of August, 2006 passed by the High
" of Uttaranchal at Nainital in Writ Petition No. 258 (SB) of
Court
2006 whereby the High Court had allowed the Writ Petition of
the Respondent No.1, relying upon the law laid down by the High
c Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in the case of In Re: Suresh
Chandra Sharma & Anr. vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors, [(2002)
1 UPLBEC 18), in which it was held that an incumbent shall be
allowed seniority with all consequential benefits from the year of.
· allotment by the State Public Service Commission.
D 3. At this stage, be it mentioned that the High Court by its
impugned order, allowing the Writ Petition had observed the
following:

"Following the judgment of the Lucknow Bench, this Court
E had also disposed of the Writ Petition no. 39(SB)/2005.
Keeping in view of the said observations, we are of the
opinion that the Respondents should be directed to treat
the Petitioner having been promoted substantively as
Forest Ranger from the year 1987-88 and to give
F consequential benefits to him. The Petitioner should be
given seniority accordingly."

4. Feeling aggrieved, the State of Uttarakhand h~s come
up in this Court by way of a special leave petition w:-,i~h on grant
of leave was heard in the presence of tht: learned counsel for
G the parties.

5. We have hear9 the learned counsel for the parties and
also examined the impugned order. On a plain reading of the
impugned judgment of the High Court, it is crystal clear that the
H
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANR. v. RAJENDRA935
SINGH ARYA AND ANR. [TARUN CHATTERJEE, J.]

• _J.
High Court, while allowing the Writ Petition of the Respondent A
Ill!" , No.1, had only relied on the decision.of the Lucknow Bench, In
Re: Suresh Chandra (Supra) which had held that an incumbent
shall be allowed seniority with all consequential benefits from the
year of allotment by the State Public Service Commission.
~

8
6. This judgment rendered in In Re: Suresh Chandra (supra)
was challenged by way of a special leave in Uttaranchal Forest
.- >- Rangers Association (Direct Recruits) & Ors. v. State of Uttar
Pradesh & Ors. [2006 (10) SCC 346] and the views expressed
.. in the case of Suresh Chandra (supra) was upset by this Court
c
by the aforesaid decision. While allowing the appeal of the State
of Uttarakhand, this Court had set aside the judgment delivered
in Suresh Chandra (supra) on which relfance was placed by the
High Court in the impugned judgment.

7. That being the position and in view of the fact that the D
.lo, decision on the basis of which the High Court had delivered its
judgment has already been overruled, we have no other
alternative but to set aside the order and to send the matter on
remand to the High Court to decide the same in accordance with
law. While deciding the writ petition after remand, it is expected E
that the High Court will take into consideration the law laid down
by this Court in the case of Uttaranchal Forest Rangers
Association (supra).
-~
.( 8. The impugned order is, therefore, set aside. The High
F
Court is requested to decide the matter keeping in mind the
views expressed by this Court in the case of Uttaranchal Forest
Association (supra) within three months from the date of
production of a copy of this order to it.

9. For the reasons aforementioned, this appeal is allowed G
._ to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs .
y
D.G. Appeal partly allowed.