B. S. YADAV AND OTHERS ETC. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ETC,

Citation: [1981] 1 S.C.R. 1024 · Decided: 05-11-1980 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.V. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 10 judgment(s) · cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

1024 
A 
B 
c 
D 
F 
G 
B. S. YADAV AND OTHERS ETC. 
v. 
STATI": OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ETC, 
November 5, 1980 
[Y. V. CHANDRACHUD, C. J., P. N. BHAGWATI, V. R. KRISHNA !YER, 
V. D. TULZAPURKAR AND A. P. SEN, JJ] 
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 235 and 309, proviso-scope of-
Govemor, . if could make rules regulating 
conditz'ons of service of judicial 
officers-If could retrospectively amend the rules-deteqnina!ion of inter se 
seniority of judicial officers and declaring that an officer has satisfactorily com-
pleted the period 
of probation, 
Governor if competent 
to do·--period of 
probation if could be reduct•d in individual cases without exceptional circums-
tances iustifying reduction. 
Rule of rotation, if could be read into rule of quota of direct recruits and 
promotees-vacant post for promotee, if could be filled by confirmation of a 
direct recruit and vice versa .. 
Exercising power under the proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution (which 
empowers the Governor to make rules regulating the recruitmeot and condi-
tions of service of persons appointed to services and posts [n connection with 
the affairs of the State) the Governor of Punjab, in consultation with the 
Punjab High Court, framed the Punjab Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1963. 
The rules provide for the direct recruitment as well as appointment by promo-
tion from the Punjab Civil Service (Judicial branch}. 
Under rule 8(2), tw;:i-
third of the total number of cadre posts have to be 
manned by promoted 
officers and one-third by direct recruits. 
Under rule 10(1) direct recruits have 
to remain on probation for two years provided that the Government may, 
in exceptional circumstance.s, redu'ce the period of probation in con>ultation 
with the High Court. The period of probation of an officer can be extended 
by the Governor beyond the period of two years in consultation with the 
High Court but not so as to exceed a total period of three years. Rule 10(2) 
empowers the Governor to confirm in consultation with the High Court a 
direct recruit on a cadre post with effect from a date not earlier than the date 
on which he completes the period of probation. 
Rule 12 (now in force in 
Haryana) provides that the seniority of direct recruits and promoted officers 
shall be determined with reference to the respective dates of their confirmation. 
Under the Punjab Rules as amended retrospectively with effect from Aprff 
9, 1976 'cadre post' means a permanent as well as a temporary post in the 
service. The inter se seniority of the members of the service is to pe deter-
mined by the length of continuous service on a post in the service irrespective 
of the date of confirmation. 
The three petitioners in the Haryana writ petitions were selected for ~e­
cruitment to the Punjab Civil Service (Judicial Branch) in a competitive exami-
nation and after the formation of the State of Haryana, they were pmmoted 
H 
in an officiating capacity to the Haryana Superior Judicial Service in 1967 and 
1968. 
Respondent No. 3 who was· a direct recruit to the Haryana Superior 
Judicial Service was appointed as a District and Sessions Judge on July 7, 
B. S. YADAV v. HARYANA 
1025 
197() and was confirmed in that post on July 7, 1972 on 6-e completion of 
A 
two year probationary period. 'The three petitioners were confirmed as District 
and Sessions Judges with effect from July 8, 1972. 
In the case of judicial officers of Punjab, although there were ten vacan-
cies in the quota of promoted officers and an equal number of promoted 
officers were officiating fol' more than three years as Additioml District and 
Sessions Judges, the High Court did not confirm the promotees in those vacan-. 
cies but confirmed the promotees and the direct recruits by applying the rule 
of rotation. Six direct rec;ruits were given prior dates of confirmation in com-
parison with the promotees, as a resnlt of which the confirmation of eight 
promotees was postponed. 
In the case of some direct recruits confirmation 
was given within a period of one year and four months though the period 
of probation was two years. 
Rule 12 was 
amended 
retrospectively frpm 
April 9, 1976 
by which 
seniority was to be determined by the length of continuous service on a post 
in the service irrespective of the date of confirmation. 
. 
. 
Rejecting the plea of one of the direct recruits that the rules '10t oniy 
required the application of a rule of quota at the time of appointment but also 
required

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