JATINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 585 · Decided: 16-09-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

JATINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 
[DR. A.S. ANAND, C.J., K. VENKATASWAMI, G.B. PATTANAIK, 
B 
S.P. KURDUKAR AND M. JAGANNADHA RAO, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Promotion-Seniority-Roster point promotees vis-a-vis-genera/ C 
candidates-Inter se seniority-Determination of-Reserved candidates 
promoted as Head Masters/Head Mistresses on the basis of roster points-
Claim for promotion to the post of Principals-Allowed by High Court 
relying on Jagdish Lal's case-Validity of-Held, in view of Ajit Singh I as 
affirmed by Ajit Singh II, reserved candidates promoted on roster points not 
entitled to claim benefit of continuous officiation in promotional post-High D 
Court not justified in allowing the claim of reserved candidates relying on 
Jagdish Lal 's case-Punjab Education Service (School ad Inspection Cadre) 
(Class JI) Rules, 1976-Rules JO &12. 
Promotion-Seniority-Roster point promotees vis-a-vis general E 
candidates-Inter se seniority-Determination of-Railways-Promotion of 
reserved candidates even after 1.3.1996 but before 1.4.1997 on the basis of 
continuous officiation-Genera/ candidates already reaching the promotional 
level-Effect of-Held, there is no need to revert the reserved candidates-
However, their promotion shall be deemed as ad hoc-Seniority and promotion 
to be 'determined following Virpa/ and Ajit Singh I as affirmed in Ajit Singh F 
JI. 
Promotion-Roster point-Applicability of-Whether can be applied 
on vacancy basis even if the roster has exhausted?-Held, no. 
In ~njab Education Department, general candidates woi:king as senior G 
Lecturers/Principals or as Deputy District Education Officers were promoted 
to the post of Principals by an order dated 3.7.1997. Persons belonging to 
reserved category, working as Head Masters/Head Mistresses challenged 
the said promotion orders by filing writ petitions and claiming promotions 
to the post of Principals. High Court allowed the writ petitions by following H 
585 
586 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A Jagdish La/'s case. Aggrieved, general candidates have filed the present 
appeals. 
In Railways, certain promotions were made even after 1.3.1996 (Ajit 
Singh I case) on the basis of the continuous officiation of the roster point 
promotees even though several general candidates had reached the 
B promotional level before the reserved candidates. Consequently, Interlocutory 
Application were filed by Railways for protecting the promotions of reserved 
candidates made after 1.3.1996 but before 1.4.1997. Besides this certain IAs 
were filed by reserved candidates, SC/ST organisations and Union of India. 
c 
Disposing of the appeals and IAs, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. Promotion of officers belonging to Punjab Education 
Department is governed by Ajit Singh I as affirmed in Ajit Singh II in regard 
to seniority and prospectivity based on R.K. Sabharwal . .Thus, High Court 
was not justified in allowing the writ petitions of reserved candidates relying 
D on Jagdish Lal. [589-G] 
E 
Ajit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, [1999] suppl. 2 SCR, relied on. 
Ajit Singh Januja & Ors. v. State of Punjab, [1996] 2 SCC 715 and R.K. 
Sabharwal v. State of Punjab, (1995] 2 SCC 745, rt:lied on. 
Jagdish Lal & Ors. v. State of Punjab, [1997] 6 SCC 538, held 
inapplicable. 
1.2. Under Punjab Education Service (School and Inspection Cadre) 
(Class II) Rules, 1976, sub-clause (3) of Rule JO states that all appointments 
F to the posts shall be made on the basis of seniOrity-cum-merit and no member 
of the service shall have any right for promotion merely on the basis of 
seniority. Rule 12 of the Rules states that inter se seniority of the members 
of the service shall be determined by the continuous length of service on a 
post counted from the date of appointment etc. As stated in Ajit Singh II, the 
G seniority rule of continuous officiation is inter linked with the promotion 
rule based on equal opportunity and cannot be delinked. The promotion of the 
reserved candidates from the post of Master/Mistress was governed by roster 
points in Punjab, by the Circular dated 19.7.69 referred to in Ajit Singh II 
which stated that 'roster points are seniority points'. The writ petitioners 
(Master/Mistress) who belonged to the reserved category admittedly got 
H promotion as Head Master/Head Mistress on the basis ofsuch a roster. On 
J.P. SINGH v. STATE 
587 
the date when the impugned order promoting the respondents was made (i.e.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.