STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS ETC. versus AKHOURI SACHINDRA NATH AND OTHERS ETC.

Citation: [1991] 2 S.C.R. 410 · Decided: 19-04-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.C. RAY · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS ETC. 
V. 
AKHOURI SACHINDRA NATH AND OTHERS ETC. 
APRIL 19, 1991 
[B.C. RAY AND R.M. SAHAI, JJ.] 
..,, 
B 
Service Law: Bihar Public Works Departments Code: Rule 2-
Bihar Engineering Service, Class II-Assistant Engineers-25% of 
posts to be filled up by promotion and 75% by direct recruitment-
Seniority promotees and direct recruits-Whether seniority can be con-
c /erred on promotees retrospectively from a date they were not born in 
,the Cadre. 
.. 
Under Rule 2 of the Bihar Public Works Department Code, the 
Governor of Bihar took a decision on 7 .4.1958 providing that 25% of the 
posts of Assistant Engineers in the Bihar Engineering Service, Class 11 
D (the Service) were to be Med by promotion, subject to availability of 
suitable hands, from Overseers in the Bihar Subordinate Engineering 
Service (Irrigation Department) and 75% of the posts were to be filled 
by direct recruitment to the Service. Respondents no. 1 to S in both 
these appeals were appointed as Assistant Engineers in the Service on 
:. 
the recommendation of the Bihar Public Service Commission in the year 
E 
1961; .and the ap)lella!tts (in Civil Appeal No. 233 of 1978 (respondents 
no. 6 to 23 in Civil Appeal No. 232 of 1978), who had been working as 
Overseers in the Bihar Subordinate Engineering Service (Irrigation 
Department) were promoted to the postS of Assistant Engineers in the 
Service In 1962 and thereafter. However, by orders dated 12. 7 .1975, 
20.1.1976 and 9 .4.1977, the Government changed the date of promotion 
~ 
F 
of the appellants to the dates prior to the appointment of respondents 
no. 1 to Sin the Service, making the former Senior to the latter. 
Respondents no. 1 to S flled writ petition before the High Court 
challenging the seniority conferred on the appellants from the retros-
pective date and contended that the orders giving promotions to the 
G 
appellants from a date earlier to date of their promotion In the Service 
purported to affect prejudicially respondents no. 1 to S's right 
inasmuch as they were appointed to the Service earlier to the promotion 
of the appellants; and that the seniority had to be reckoned amongst the 
"" 
officials working as Assistant Engineers in the Service from the date of 
their appointment or promotion to the said Service. The appellants 
H contended that they were entitled to be promoted retrospectively on the 
410 
-
STATE OF BIHAR v. A.S. NATI' 
411 
basis of reservation of 25% of the Cadre posts in the Service till 1958. 
The High Court, holding that the orders promoting the appellants 
-~ 
with retrospective effect were bad, quashed the same and allowed .the 
writ petition. Hence the present appeals. 
A 
On consideration of the legality and validity of the orders of the · B 
Government giving promotions to the appellants from a date earlieNo 
the date of their entry into -the Service as Assistant Engineers, and its 
effect on the inter-se seniority amongst the appellants and respondents 
no. 1 to 5, who were directly appointed as Assistant Engineers in the 
j 
Service before the appellants entered in the said Service. 
Dismissing the appeals, this Court, 
_HELD: 1. The Government Orders dated 12.7.1975, 20.1.1976 
c 
and 9.4.1977 which purported to give promotion to the appellants 
retrospectively were arbitrary, illegal and inoperative inasmuch as 
these seriously affected respondents no. 1 to 5. The appellants were not 
D 
borne in the cadre of Assistant Engineers even in officiating capacity at 
time when respondents no. 1 to 5 were directly recruited to the post of 
Assistant Engineer. As such, the promotee appellants could not be under 
any circumstance given seniority over the directly recruited respondents 
no. 1 to 5. The judgment of the High Court in quashing the impugned 
Government Orders was, therefore, unexceptionable. [418F-H; 420A] 
E 
2.1 No person can be promoted with retrospective effect from a 
... 
date when he was not home in the Cadre so as to adversely affect others; 
and amongst members of the same grade, seniority is reckoned from the 
date of their initial entry into the service. [419F] 
F 
2.2 Seniority inter-se amongst the Assistant Engineers in Bihar 
Engineering Service, Class 11 would be considered from the date of th~ 
length of service rendered as Assistant Engineers. Therefore, the appel-
lants could not be made senior to respondents no. 1 to 5 by the 
impugned Government Orders as they entered into the said Service in 

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