DIRECTOR GENERAL GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA versus GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION

Citation: [1991] 2 S.C.R. 893 · Decided: 11-07-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

DIRECTOR GENERAL GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA 
AND ORS. 
v. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA EMPLOYEES 
ASSOCIATION. 
JULY 11, 1991 
[K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY AND YOGESHWAR DAYAL, JJ.l 
Civil Service-Exploration Wing of the Indian Bureau of Mines 
and Geological Survey of India-Merger-Whether with effect from 
1.1.1966 or from 4/6.2.1969--Provisional seniority list and statement of 
introduction to the compilation-Whether constitute proof of merger. 
In Civil Appeal No. 855(N) of 1979 and Civil Appeal No. 2665 of 
1991 the issne raised was common and relating to the date of merger of 
the two departments of the Government of India, in the field of mines 
and minerals, namely (i) Exploration Wing of the Indian Bnreau of 
Mines (IBM) and (ii) Geological Survey oflndia (GSI). 
Between I. I. 1966 to 4. 2.1969 thirty nine Lower Division Clerks 
belonging to GSI were promoted as Upper Division Clerks against the 
vacancies that arose in the GSI. They were juniors to their counterparts 
in the IBM. Being aggrieved by the said promotions, the respondents 
who originally belonged to the IBM, preferred Special Civil Application 
in the Bombay High Court for setting aside the seniority list and for a 
direction to consider their cases of promotion with effect from 
I January, 1966 contending that the merger of the two departments took 
place with effect from I January 1966 and not from 4 February 1969 
and therefore, there cannot be two separate channels of promotions 
from I January 1966--one from the employees of the Exploration Wing 
of IBM and another for the employees of GSI. 
The appellants contended that the Officers of GSI were promoted 
on the gronnd that the actual merger took place not on 1 January 1966 
but on 4 February 1969. 
The High Court allowed the petition against which Civil Appeal 
No. 855(N) of 1979 has been preferred. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
A Senior Technological Assistant (Geology) of the erstwhile IBM 
moved the Karnataka High Court for similar relief contending inter 
H 
893 
894 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1991] 2 S.C.R. 
A alia that his case ought to have been considered for promotion in the 
merger cadre with effect from I January 1966. The Karnataka High 
Court also allowed his claim with a direction to consider him for prom11-
tion with effect from I January 1966 in the merged cadre. That decision 
was not implemented by the GSI. In the contempt proceedings taken for 
disobedience of the judgment, the High Court allowed six weeks time 
B 
for compliance, against which, SLP(C) No. 4906 of 1991 has been 
preferred. 
c 
Respondents relying on the letters dated IO December 1965 and 29 
November 1966 contended in support of the decision of the High Courts 
that the merger took place on I January 1966, whereas the appellants 
took assistance from the terms of the letter dated 4/6 February 1969 in 
support of the counter plea. 
Allowing the appeals, this Court, 
HELD: I. The statements in the letter make it abundantly clear 
D that it was only administrative control of the relevant wings of IBM that 
were transferred to GSI with effect from I January 1966. The letter 
does not refer to the decision of merger of the two departments. [902E] 
2. The decision taken on the merger of the posts was com-
municated by subsequent letters dated 28 June 1967 and 4/6 February 
E 
1969. By letter dated 28th June 1967 the Government communicated 
the sanction of merger of class I & II posts in the drilling divisions of 
Exploration Wing of IBM and GSI (Proper) with immediate effect. The 
letter also contains certain instructions to department about service 
conditions and seniority of persons in the amalgamated cadres of class I 
& II posts. The decision with regard to merger in respect of other 
F 
categories of posts which include are concerned in these cases is con-
tained in the letter dated 4/6 February 1969. [902F-G] 
3. The letter dated 4/6 February 1969 further provides that the inter-se 
seniority of the incumbent in the merged cadres will be governed in 
accordance with the principles laid down in the earlier letter dated 
G 
28th June 1967. The merger/revision of the scales of pay ·does not 
involve any change in the nature of duties of the respective posts. The 
Officers concerned in the merged cadre will be given options in writing 
for opting the new scales of pay in the merged cadre. In case an indi-
vidual concerned fails to exercise the option within the time limit, he 
will be treated to have accepted the new scale 

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