SATPAL ANTIL AND ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 05-05-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. SAWANT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

SATPAL ANTIL AND ANR. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
MAY 5, 1995 
[P.B. SAWANT AND G.N. RAY, JJ.] 
Service Law : 
Post and Telegraph Civil Engineering (Civil Gazetted Officers) Recmit-
ment Rules, 1976 : 
Chapters 5 to 8-Junior Engineer (Civilj-:--Promotion to the post of 
Assistant Engineer (Civil }-Departmental Examinatio1t-Inter-se seniority be-
tween the candidates passing the examination in the same year-Determina-
tion of-No express provision in the mies-Held.' general principles of length 
of service as a basis for promotion will be applicable. 
Post and Telegraph Manual : 
Para 206 Vol.IV-Noi applicable to Civil Engineering Cadre-Seniority 
of candidates passing the examination in the same year but at different point 
A 
B 
c 
D 
of time-Fixation of-No provision exists in the manuaf-ffe/d: candidate E 
passing the examination in the same year but at a different point of time 
cannot be by passed for promotion. 
The appellants were initially appointed as Junior Engineers (Civil) 
in the Telecommunication Department Civil Division. For promotion to 
the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil), a Notification was issued inviting F 
the persons who were already in service as Junior Engineer (Civil) in the 
Telecommunication Department, Civil Division to appear in the qualifying 
examination. Both the appellants appeared in the said examination and 
were declared successful. The Superintending Engineer (Civil) sent the 
seniority list of Junior Engineer (Civil) of his circle. The names of the G 
appellants. had been shown respectively at Serial Nos. 20 and 27 in the 
Seniority List. They challenged the said seniority list before the Central 
Administrative Tribunal which was repelled. Aggrieved by the judgment of 
the Tribunal the appellants preferred the present appeal. 
On behalf of the appellants it was contended that the candidates who H 
1 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A 
had passed the qualifying examination at an earlier point of time should 
be treated as senior to those passing at a later point of time; that para 206 
P&T Manual Vol. IV was equally applicable to Officers of all branches of 
P&T services as a reference to para 1 and chapter 7 of the said Manual 
would indicate; and that Recruitment Rules, 1976 were silent as to the 
B 
c 
determination of inter-se seniority. 
On behalf of the respondents it was contended that para 206 P & T 
Manual Vol. (V is not at all applicable to the appellants; and that the 
general rules "Of length of service in determining the seniority must be made 
applicable. 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. There is no express provision in the P&T Civil Engineer-
ing (Civil Gazetted Officers) Recruitment Rules which controls the inter-se 
seniority between the candidates passing the departmental examination in 
D the same year for being eligible to be promoted to the post of Assistant 
Engineer (Civil). Para 206 of P & T Manual, in terms are not applicable 
to the cadre of the service to which the appellants belong. The appellants 
are governed by different set of rules known as Post and Telegraph Civil 
Engineering (Civil Gazetted Officers) Recruitment Rules, 1976 and para 
E 206 of P & T Manual governs the service of the Assistant Engineers 
Wireless. For promotion under the 1976 rules, the Junior Engineers (Civil) 
who have qualified in the departmental examination and have not rendered 
not less that 8 years of service in the grade will be eligible for promotion. 
Such rules for promotion does not contain any provision for determining 
inter-se seniority for the purpose of giving promotion earlier or later with 
F 
reference to date of passing the qualifying examination. In the absence of 
any specific rule indicating inter-se seniority to be observed with reference 
to the date of passing the qualifying examination and promotion to be 
given on the basis of such inter-se seniority, general principle of length of 
service as a basis for promotion amongst eligible candidates with qualify-
G ing service should be made applicable. Para 1 of P & T Manual Vol. IV 
indicates that the general rule will apply equally to Officers of all the 
branches of service unless it is otherwise expressly specified to a particular 
branch of service. [11-F to H, 12-A-B] 
2. The special rules which are applicable to particular branches have 
H been laid down in Chapter. 5 to Chapter 8. Since the appellants are 
A
•
SATPALANTIL v. U.0.1. [G.N.RAY,J.] 
3 
,!_ 
governed by 

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