MD. RAISUL ISLAM AND ORS. versus GOKUL MOHAN HAZARIKA AND ORS.

Citation: [2010] 7 S.C.R. 732 · Decided: 06-07-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ALTAMAS KABIR · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2010] 7 S.C.R. 732 
MD. RAISUL ISLAM AND ORS. 
v. 
GOKUL MOHAN HAZARIKA AND ORS. 
(Special Leave Petition (C) No. 19188 of 2007) 
JULY 06, 2010 
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] 
Assam Civil Services (Class-I) Rules, 1960: rr.4, 19 -
Selection/Seniority - Selection process started on the basis 
C of the existing Service Rules - Held: Existing rules would 
continue to govern the selection process, notwithstanding any 
amendment to the said Rules in the meantime - Seniority 
would thus be governed by the existing rule - Assam Civil 
Services (Class-I) Amendment Rules, 1986 - Service law -
D Seniority. 
An advertisement was published on 22.5.1984 for 
filling up 30 posts in each category of ACS Class-I and 
ACS Class-II Officers in terms of unamended rule 4 of the 
E Assam Civil Services (Class-I) Rules, 1960. Written test 
was conducted and the result was declared on 22.2.1986. 
Interview was conducted by APSC in respect of 
candidates successful in written examination .. A list of 
recommended candidates was submitted by the APSC to 
the Government on 22.6.1986. The amendment to rule 4 
F 
came subsequently on 21.7.1986 by the Assam Civil 
Services (Class-I) Amendment Rules, 1986 whereby the 
number of persons to be promoted from ACS Class-II to 
ACS Class-I was left to be decided by the Governor and 
G 
H 
the earlier quota of 50% for promotion was discontinued. 
129 ACS Class-II Officers, including the petitioners, 
were regularly promoted as ACS Class-I officers on 
11.9.1986. Thereafter on 22.10.1986, ACS Class-I Officers, 
including the respondents, were appointed by way of 
732 
MD. RAISUL ISLAM AND ORS. v. GOKUL MOHAN 
733 
HAZARIKA AND ORS. 
direct recruitment on the basis of the recommendations 
A 
made by the APSC. On 1.1.1993, a draft seniority list was 
prepared wherein all 129 Officers promoted on 11.9.1986 
were shown as senior to 45 ACS Class-I Officers who 
were appointed by direct recruitment on various dates in 
the month of October 1986. 
B 
Respondents 1 to 8 challenged the draft seniority list 
High Court held that tlie seniority of the direct recruits 
and promotees would be governed by the unamended 
rules as the selection process was initiated prior to the 
1986 amendment. Hence the Special Leave Petition. 
C 
Dismissing the Special Leave Petition, the Court 
HELD: 1. Once a process of selection is started on 
the basis of the existing Rules of recruitment, the said 
Rules would continue to govern the selection process, 
D 
notwithstanding any amendment which may haye been 
effected to the said Rules in the meantime. Accordingly, 
the seniority of members of the service would, no doubt, 
be governed under Rule 19 of Assam Civil Services 
(Class-I) Rules, 1960 but the selection process has to be 
E 
completed under Rule 4 in order to attract the provisions 
of Rule 19. The High Court was right in directing that the 
vacancies for which the advertisement was published in 
1984 be filled up on the basis of the unamended Rule 4 
which provided for quota between promotees and direct 
F 
recruits and in placing 45 of the direct recruits 
immediately below the first 45 promotees out of the list 
of 12-9- promotees in keeping with the said quota system 
for the year 1986. (Paras 27, 28] (747-B-C; 746-G-H; 747-
~ 
G 
Dr. K. Ramu/u & Anr. v. Dr. S. Suryaprakash Rao & Ors. 
(1997) 3 SCC 59, Distinguished. 
Suraj Parkash Gupta & Ors. v. State of J & K and Ors. 
(2000) 7 SCC 561; State of Uttaranchal & Anr. v. Dinesh 
H 
734 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 7 S.C.R. 
A Kumar Sharma (2007) 1 SCC 683; Uttaranchal Forest 
Rangers' Assn. (Direct Recruit) v. State of U.P. (2006) 10 SCC 
346; N. T. Devin Katti v. Karnataka Public Service 
Commission (1990) 3 SCC 157, referred to. 
B 
Case Law Reference: 
(2000) 1 sec 561 
referred to 
Para 18 
(2007) 1 sec 683 
referred to 
Para 18 
(2006) 10 sec 346 
referred to 
Para 21 
c 
(1990) 3 sec 157 
referred to 
Para 22 
(1997) 3 sec 59 
Distinguished 
Paras 24, 25, 26 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : SLP (Civil) No . 
. D 19188 of 2007. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 23.5.2007 of the High 
Court of Gauhati in Writ Appeal No. 5 of 2004. 
Vijay Hansaria, Sneha Kalita, Shankar Divate for the 
E Petitioner. 
F 
Parthiv Goswami, A. Henry, Rajiv Mehta, J.R". Luwang, 
Riku Sharma (for Corporate Law Group) for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
ALTAMAS KABIR, J. 1. On the request of the Government 
of Assam to select candidates by way of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.