ANAND CHANDRA DASH versus STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

Citation: [1998] 1 S.C.R. 81 · Decided: 13-01-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. SAGHIR AHMAD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

ANAND CHANDRA DASH 
A 
v. 
~,~\-
STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. 
JANUARY 13, 1998 
[S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
B 
' 
:'. 
Service Law : 
Seniority-Fixation of-Service rendered in other departments- c 
Reckoning of-For determination of seniority-Employee while working as 
Senior Auditor in Revenue and Excise Department was transferred to labour 
Department despite his unwillingness-He never agreed to the condition 
imposed by the Labour Department that his seniority would be determined 
ji-om the date of his joining that Department-His request for being reverted 
D 
,..!._ 
to parent department not granted--,-Held: Employee entitled to seniority in 
..... 
Labour Department ji-om the date of his joining as Senior Auditor in the 
Revenue and Excise department-His promotion also directed to be given on 
notional basis and retrial benefits re-calculated 
The appellant, while working as Senior Auditor in the Revenue and E 
Excise Department, was relieved and forced to join as Senior Auditor in the 
Labour Department despite his unwillingness. The appellant had never agreed 
to the condition imposed by· the Labour Department that his seniority would 
be determined on the basis of his date of joining the Labour Department. The 
appellant's request for being reverted to his parent department was not 
F 
granted. In the seniority list prepared by the Labour Department the appellant 
- * 
was shown as junior to the respondents. The State Administrative Tribunal 
dismissed the petition filed by the appellant. Hence this appeal. 
A.llowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : I. It is no doubt true that the Labour Department had indicated G 
that the seniority of the appellant will be determined on the basis of the date 
"'\ 
of his joining the Labour Department itself but the appellant has at, no point 
of time, agreed to the said condition and, on the other hand, unequivocally 
expressed his unwillingness to come over to the Labour Department and 
without consideration of the same the Revenue and Excise Department relived H 
81 
82 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1998] I S.C.R. 
A him to join the Labour Department. Hence, the services of the appellant as 
a Senior Auditor in the Revenue and Excise Department shalJ be taken into· 
-t-
account for determining his seniority in the cadre of Senior Auditor in the 
Labour Department. 184-C-Fl 
B 
2. If the appelJant is found suitable, notional promotion may be given 
to him and his retiral benefits may be re-calculated on that basis. 184-GI 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.: Civil Appeal No. 3022 of 1990. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.7.1987 of the Orissa Administrative 
,• c Tribunal in Transfor Application No. 116 of 1986. 
Debasis Mohanty and Janaranjan Das for the Appellants. 
C.S. Srinivasa Rao for the Respondents. 
D 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
G.B. PATT ANAIK, J. The order dated 21st of July 1987 passed by the 
Orissa Administrative Tribunal dismissing the Transferred Application No. 
166 of 1986 of the appellant is under challenge in this appeal. The appellant 
was appointed initially in the year 1956 as a Sevak in the Tribal and Rural 
E Welfare Department and then later on was appointed as L.D. Clerk in the 
District Welfare Office, Phulbani. From the post ofLD Clerk he was promoted 
to the post of Upper Division Clerk in April 1961 a~d was confirmed on that 
post in April 1969. Prior to his confirmation as Upper Division Clerk he was 
further promoted to the post of Senior Auditor, Board of Revenue, Cuttack 
F on being recommended by the Collector Phulbani and on being selected. Later 
on his services were transferred to the Revenue and Excise Department, 
Bhubaneshwar as a Senior Auditor where he was continuing with effect from 
1.8.1967. In the year 1970 the Labour & Employment & Housing Department 
issued a requisition to all the Government Departments for sending the names 
to fill up the post of Senior Auditor in the Labour Department. Appellant's 
G name was also sent alongwith others by the Revenue Department. The appellant 
was selected for being abso.rbed in the Labour Department and he was asked 
to offer his willingness by Revenue & Excise Department by letter dated 
'y
31.10.1970. The appellant expressed his unwillingness to join the new 
department but notwithstanding the same the employer Revenue Department 
H relieved him by order dated 7 .11.1970 and the appellant was forced to join the 
. -{ 
,_ 
~ 
,..._ 
. .,, 
# 
.... 
~ 
-
,_ 
..._,

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.