SMT. RENU MULLICK versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Citation: [1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 825 · Decided: 19-11-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH, B.P. JEEVAN REDDY

Judgment (excerpt)

SMT. RENU MULLICK 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
NOVEMBER 19, 1993 
[KULDIP SINGH AND B.P. JEEVAN REDOY, JJ.] 
Se111ice law-Central Board of ExciJe and Cu_stoms-lnter-Collectorate 
Trans/ erS"-Executive instntctions regarding-Interpretations of. 
A 
B 
Central Excise and Land Custom~epartment Group 'C' Posts C 
Recruitment Rules, 1979 : Rule ~Schedule-:-Interpretation of. 
Under the executive instructions dated May 20, 1980, issued by the 
Central Board of Excise and Customs, a group 'C' Officer, when transferred 
on his own request from one Collectorate to another was not entitled to 
count the service rendered by him in the former Collectorate for the pur- D 
pose of seniority in the new charge i.e. he was to be treated as a new entrant 
in the Collectorate to which he was transferred and was to be placed at the 
bottom of the list of the employees of the concerned cadre in the new charge. 
The appellant, who joined the Directorate of Statistics and Intel-
ligence, Central Excise and Customs, New Delhi on 17th December 1974 E 
as Lower Division Clerk and was promoted as Upper Division Clerk on 
May 10, 1981, was transferred, on her oWll request, to Excise Collectorate, 
Allahabad by an order dated July 30, 1987 which she joined as Upper 
Division Clerk on August 4, 1987. In November, 1989, she was promoted 
as Inspector in accordance with the Central Excise and Land Cdstoms p 
Department Group 'C' Posts Recruitment Rules, 1979, under which a 
U.D.C. with S years service or U.D.C. with 13 years of total service as 
U.D.C. and L.D.C. taken together subject to the condition that he should 
have put in a minimum of two years of service in the grade of U.D.C., was 
eligible to be considered for promotion. However, by an order dated 
February 20, 1992, she was reverted from the post of Inspector. She . G 
challenged the reversion order before Central Administrative Tribunal, 
Allahabad. The Tribunal upheld the reversion order and accepted the 
respondent-Union of India's stand that on transfer the service rendered 
by her at Delhi was wiped off for all purposes including determination of 
her eligibility for promotion to the post of Inspector. Against the decision H 
825 
826 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1993) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A of the Tribunal, appeal was filed in this Court. 
Allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment of the Tribunal, 
this Court, 
HELD : 1. The Tribunal failed to appreciate the elementary rules of 
B interpretation and fell into patent error in non-suiting the appellant. 
(830-F] 
2. A.bare reading of para 2(ii) of the executive instructions dated 
May 20, 1980 shows that the transferee is not entitled to count the service 
rendered by him in the former Collectorate for the purpose of seniority in 
C the neW charge. The later part of that para cannot be read differently. The 
transferee is to be treated as a new entrant in the Collectorate to which he 
is transferred for the purpose of seniority. The seniority in the previous 
Collectorate is taken away for the purpose of counting the seniority in the 
new charge but that has no relevance for judging eligibility for promotion 
D under a statutory rule. The eligibility for promotion has to be determined 
with reference to Rule 4 alone, which prescribes the criteria for eligibility. 
There is no other way of reading the instructions. If the instructions are 
read the way the Tribunal has done, it may be open to challenge on the 
ground of arbitrariness. (829-G-H, 830-A·C] 
E 
3. There is no indication, whatsoever in Rule 4 of the Central Excise 
and Land Customs Department Group 'C' Posts Recruitment Rules, 1979 
that the service period of 5 years and 13 years is not applicable to an officer 
who has been transferred from one collectorate to another on his own 
request. On the plain language of the rule, the appellant, having served the 
department for more than 5 years as U.D.C. and also having completed 13 
F years composite service as U.D.C. and L.D.C. including two years mini· 
mum service as U.D.C., was eligible to be considered for promotion to the 
post of Inspector. The order reverting the appellant, from the post of 
Inspector to the post of Tax Assistant is quashed. [830·D·E] 
G 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7143 of 
1993. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 1.6.92 of the Central Ad-
ministrative Tribunal, Allahabad in 0.A. No. 297 of 1992. 
H 
H.K. Puri, Sunil Gupta and J.S. Bey for the Appellant. 
. " 
SMT: RENU v. U.0.1. [

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