DIRECTOR, LIFT IRRIGATION CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus PRAVAT KIRAN MOHANTY AND ORS.

Citation: [1991] 1 S.C.R. 341 · Decided: 12-02-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

-
DIRECTOR, LIFT IRRIGATION CORPORATION LTD. AND 
ORS. ETC. ETC. 
v. -
PRA VAT KIRAN MOHANTY AND ORS. 
·FEBRUARY 12, 1991 
[KULDIP SINGH AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] 
Civil Services: Orissa State Lift Irrigation Corporation Ltd.-
Reorganisation of set up-Amalgamation of composite cadre of Electri-
cal-Mechanical into Electrical or Mechanical cadre-Validity of-
Gradation List-Fitment of personnel of composite cadre as per date of 
initial appointment vis-acvis scale of pay-Consequent loss of seniority 
and reduction in chances of promotion-Whether violative of Articles 
14 and 16 of the Constitution-Right to promotion-Whether a funda-
mental right. 
A 
B 
c 
Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 14 and 16--Gradation 
D 
List-Prepared consequent to amalgamation of cadres-Seniority and 
chances of promotion affected-Whether violative of right to equality-
Right to Promotion-Whether a fundamental right. 
Administrative Law: Judicial Review-Policy decision to reor-
~-
ganise set up and amalgamate cadres on administrative exigency-
E 
Whether open to judicial review. 
The Lift Irrigation Corporation Ltd. had three categories of 
services, namely, Mechanical, Electrical and Composite unit of 
Mechanical-Electrical when it was carved out of the Government 
organisation. Subsequently, due to administrative exigency, the Corpo-
ration decided to reorganise its set up and classify the employees into 
two categories' namely, Electrical and Mechanical by amalgamating 
the composite Electrical and Mechanical Engineering diploma holders 
either in Electrical or Mechanical wing, and invited objections to the 
scheme. It ·also called for options from persons holding only the compo-
site diploma, namely, Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Super-
visors. On consideration of options received, the Corporation prepared 
two gradation lists in the order of seniority from the respective dates of 
appointment to the posts and higher scale of pay held by respective 
persons and fitted them in the respective lists as per options. 
F 
G 
Respondent No. 1, a diploma holder in Electrical Engineering, who 
H 
341 
A 
B 
c 
D 
342 
. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1991] 1 S.C.R . 
was working as Sub-Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in Government 
service, and had been drawn on deputation to the Corporation along. 
with Respondents No. 6 and. 7, appellants in third appeal, holders of 
double diploma in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, and working 
as Mechanical Supervisors, along with others, had not filed any objec-
tion to the scheme, but questioned before the High Court the grada-
tion of Respondents No. 6 and 7 and others in the Electrical Wing. 
The High Court quashed the gradation lists and directed the 
Government and the Corporation to treat Respondent No. 1 and the 
other respondents as belonging to two cadres of Sub-Assistant Engineer 
(Electrical) and (Mechanical) respectively. 
Th~ Corporation, the State Government and the aggrieved 
employees filed separate appeals, by special leave, contending that the 
Corporation had the power to amalgamate the three sections into two, 
due to administrative exigency and to prepare seniority lists from re-
spective dates of employees' initial appointment, etc. 
Respondent No. 1 contended that his seniority as No. 2 in the 
Electrical Wing could ilot be disturbed by taking Mechanical Super-
visors into the Electrical Wing offending his right to promotion 
enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. 
· 
E 
Allowing the appeals, this Court, 
HELD: 1.1 The Government or the Corporation, due to adminiS-
trative. exigencies, is entitled to and has power to reorganise the existing 
cadres or amalgamate some or carve out separate cadres. The decision 
to amalgamate the existing cadres by reorganising them into two cadres 
y-
F 
being a policy decision, taken on administrative exigencies, is not open 
~ lo-:-. 
to judicial review unless it is mala fide, arbitrary or bereft of any . 
\. 
discernible principle. [345E, G] 
1.2 On account of amalgamation into two cadres by absorbing the 
personnel working in the composite cadre, namely, Electrical-Mechani-
G 
cal in either Electrical or Mechanical cadre, and their adjustment, the 
order of seniority of the employees working in Electrical or Mechanical 
cadres is likely to be reviewed. When the persons in the composite 
Electrical-Mechanical cadre opted to the Electrical cadre, they were 
entitled to be considered for their fitment in the cadre as per the s

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