M. AMANULLAH KHAN versus GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 797 · Decided: 25-08-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

M. AMANULLAH KHAN 
V. 
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS. 
AUGUST 25, 2004 
[ARIJIT PASAYAT AND D.M. DHARMADHIKARI, JJ.] 
Indian Forest Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules. 1966/Indian 
Forest Service (Cadre) Rules, 1966 : 
A 
B 
rr. 3(2)(c) and 2(g)lr.9-0fficer in State Forest Department- C 
Appointed to IFS-Claim for seniority from date of continuous officiation 
on cadre posts-Held, in absence of prior concurrence of Central 
Government and prior approval of Union Public Service Commission., 
temporary appointment to cadre posts is a mere ad hoc or local arrangement 
or fortuitous. 
The appellant, an officer in the Forest Department of the State 
Government, was appointed to the Indian Forest Service on 27.3.1992. 
D 
He filed an original application before the Central Administrative 
Tribunal contending that from 6.8.1980 onwards he officiated on cadre E 
posts and, therefore, his long officiation would be taken as continuous 
officiation for the purpose of fixing his seniority in the I.F.S. The stand 
of the Union oflndia and the State Government was that the applicant 
was neither a cadre officer nor a Select List Officer and in absence of 
a certificate by the State Government in terms of Explanation 4 to Rule p 
3(2)(c) of the Indian Forest Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 
I 966 the officiation was fortuitous and of no consequence. It was 
further contended for the Union of India that the applicant being a 
non-cadre officer, who had officiated on a cadre post beyond the period 
of 6 months could not claim the servke for seniority in absence of G 
approval from the Central Government and the Union Public Service 
Commission in terms of Rule 9 of the Indian Forest Service (Cadre) 
Rules. 1966. The Tribunal dismissed the application. Aggrieved, the 
applicant filed the present appeal. 
H 
797 
798 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: In view of Rule 3 read with Rule 2(g) of the Indian Forest 
Service (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1966, the period of continuos 
officiation in senior posts would count only from the date of inclusion 
B in the Select List or from the date of officiating appointment to senior 
post whichever is later. Where temporary appointment to the vacancy/ 
vacancies in cadre posts continue for more than three months, the prior 
concurrence of the Central Government is mandatory. If it continues 
for more than six months prior approval of the Union Public Service 
C Commission is also mandatory. Any appointment in violation thereof 
is not an appointment in accordance with the law but a mere ad hoc 
D 
or local arrangement or fortuitous. In view of the decisions in Syed 
Khalid Rizvi 's* case and R.R.S. Chauhan 's** case, the judgment of the 
Central Administrative Trib:mal does not suffer from any infirmity to 
warrant interfence. [802-A; 804-B-C; 805-C) 
*Syed Khalid Rizvi and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., [1993] Supp. 
3 SCC 575 and uR.R.S. Chauhan and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., 
[1995] Supp. 3 SCC 109, relied on. 
E 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 7252 of 
F 
G 
H 
1999. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 7 .3 .1996 of the Central 
Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench in O.A. No. 1368/93. 
Amarendra Sharan, Additional Solicitor General, R.P. Bhatt, R.P. 
Wadhwani, Pumima Bhatt Kak, P. Parmeswaran, R. Ayyam Perumal, 
Subramonium Prasad and R. Nedumaran for the appearing parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delviered by 
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.: Challenge in this appeal is to the legality 
of judgment rendered by the Chennai Bench of the Central Administrative 
Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'CAT'). Appellant was applicant 
in two original application nos. 1188/1993 and 1368/1993. The present 
M.A. KHAN v. GOVT. OF INDIA [PASAYAT, J.] 
799 
appeal relates to OA No. 1368/1993. By the common judgment the original A 
applications of two applicants i.e. the present appellant and one Mr. N. 
Veeramani were disposed of. In the concerned O.A. claim of the appellant 
was as follows: 
Between 6.8.1980 and 14.12.1982 he was holding the post of B 
Divisional Manager, Coonoor Division, Tamil Nadu Tea Plantation 
Corporation, Coonoor. Between 15.12.1982 and 12.6.1986, he was Sub 
Divisional Forest Officer in the Social Forestry Division at Tiruchendur. 
From 13.6.1986 to 12.2.1988, he was Divisional Forest Officer, Social 
Forestry Division, Tirunelveli. From 13.2.1988 to 22.7.1990, he was 
Divisional Forest 

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