NIRMAL KUMAR CHOUDHARY & ORS. ETC. versus STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS., ETC.

Citation: [1988] 2 S.C.R. 410 · Decided: 16-12-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RANGANATH MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
NIRMAL KUMAR CHOUDHARY & ORS. ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS., ETC. 
DECEMBER 16, 1987 
[RANGANATH MISRA AND G.L. OZA, JJ.] 
Service matter-Amalganation of different cadres of employees 
and resultant gradation-Challenge thereto. 
Civil Appeal Nos. 2049 and 3129 of 1979 were filed in this Court 
by special leave against the judgment of the High Court in a Writ 
Petition filed by respondents 6 to 51 of Civil Appeal No. 2049 of 1979. 
One appeal was· by the employees and the other, by the State of Bihar, 
etc., against the judgment of the High Court above-said. 
There were three different wings of Engineers in the Department 
of Agriculture, viz., Irrigation, minor Irrigation and River Valley Pro-
jects. On January 9, 1969, the State Government amalgamated the 
cadres of engineers and other employees of the Irrigation and the River 
Valley departments. Engineers and other employees of the minct Irri-
E gation wing were not amalgamated. Later, the Directorate of minor 
Irrigatiiin was made permanent and a distinct and permanent cadre of 
overseers termed as Junior Engineers, was created. 191 permanent 
posts of overseers were sanctioned. Thereafter, the minor Irrigation 
· wing was also amalgamated with the other two wings, and a combined 
final gradation list prepared on the basis of the status of the overseers as 
r obtaining onJanuary 9, 1969, was issued. 
On the Writ Petition of the respondents 6 to 51 above-mentioned, 
the High Court quashed the orders contained in the various annexures 
viz 11.11/1, 12, 13, 13/1, 15 and 16 directed the State Government to 
prepare a fresh combined gradation list in accordance with the princi-
G pies laid down by the High Court. 
Allowing the appeals in part, the Court, 
HELD: Tbe three wings though nod.er the administrative control 
of the Agricultural Department, were separate before amalgamation. 
H Permanent posts had been sanctioned in the minor Irrigation wing to 
410 
N.K. CHOUDHARY v. STATE OF BIHAR 
411 
which the petitioners before the High Court belonged and they were 
A 
appointed on permanent basis. When integration takes place and offic-
ers in different cadres are merged into one, there is bound to be some 
difficulty in the matter of adjustment. That has occurred in this case. 
The approach of the High Court has been that if within the cadre earlier 
confirmation gives seniority why should that basis be not extended to 
the combined gradation list. That may not be applicable in every 
B 
sitnation-particularly when there is a merger of cadres and the com-
bined gradation list is proposed. [414C-D, FI 
Seniority would ordinarily depend upon the length of service, 
subject, of course, to the rules holding the field. This view has been 
taken by this Court in several cases. The High Court recorded a finding 
C 
that there is no applicable rule In the matter of fixing inter se seniority 
in a situation of this type. In the absence of rules, the more equitable 
way of preparing the combined gradation list would be to take the total 
length of service in the common cadre as the basis for determining the 
inter se seniority The Court does not agree with the High Court that 
confirmation should be the basis and would substitute it by the length of 
D 
service test, but the Court upholds the direction that in fixing the com-
bined gradation list the inter se seniority of Incumbents in their respec-
tive departments would not be disturbed. The gradation list as pub-
lished by the Government has to be modified. The conclusion of the 
High Court that Annexnres 11, 11/1, 12, 13, 13/l, 15 and 16 should be 
quashed and a fresh combined gradation list has to be published, is 
E 
confirmed. The test for fixing the seniority inter se generally, is altered, 
hut the direction of inter se seniority in their own departments to be 
respected is approved. The respondent-State directed to prepare and 
publish the fresh combined gradation list keeping these directions in 
view. [414G; 415C-F) 
A. Janardhana v. Union of India and Ors., (198312SCR936 and 
K.S. Vora and Ors. v. State of Gujarat and Ors., (1987) 4 J.T. 179, 
referred to. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 2049 
F 
and 3128 of 1979. 
G 
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.3.1979 of the High Court 
of Patna in C.W.J.C. No. 1820 of 1977. 
Dr. Y.S. Chitale, S.S. Javali, Narendra Prasad and Ranjit 
Kumar for the Appellants. 
H 
412 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1988] 2 S.C.R. 
S.N. Kacker, and L.N. Sinha D. Go
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.