STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. AW. DHOPE AND ORS versus SHRI SANJAY THAKRE AND ORS.

Citation: [1995] 2 S.C.R. 542 · Decided: 07-03-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. AW. DHOPE AND ORS; 
....,._ 
v. 
SHRI SANJAY THAKRE AND ORS. 
MARCH 7, 1995 
B 
(K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] 
Service Law 
Seniorily-74ssistant Conservator of Forests-:lJirect recruits-
C Promotees-Quota rule-Direct recruitment not made as per rule-Reasons 
given by State-Rejection by Tribunal-Interference by Supreme Court not 
___,called for-Held quota rule ·was not broken down-Appointment of 
Promotees held in violation of rule i.e. fortuitious-Seniority cannot be 
counted from the date of f ortuitious promotions-Executive instruc-
D lions-Deviations by State-Deprecation of. 
In a seniority dispute between the direct recruits and promotees 
belonging to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forests in Maharashtra 
Forest Service, the appellant-State and some of the promotees contended 
,. before the State Administrative Tribunal that the quota rule laid down by 
E the service rules had broken down as direct recruitment was not made for 
a long period because of non•availability of. pre-recruitme~t tl-aining 
facility and the requirement of the Indian Forests Service (Recruitment) 
Rules, 1966 to make initial recruitment from the State Forest Service. 
Rejecting these reasons given by State and observing that even the State 
p was silent as to whether promotions were fortuitious, the Tribunal allowed 
the applications of direct recruits and directed the appellants to determine 
inter-se seniority by following the quota rules. 
G 
In appeal to this Court by State as well as some of the promotees it 
was contended on behalf of the appellants that (i) the Tribunal erred in 
rejecting the reasons given by the State for not making direct recruitment 
as per rules; (ii) the ad hoc service rendered by promotees should be 
reckoned for computing seniority; (iii) the promotees were not appointed 
fortuitiously; and (iv) as the concerned provisions laying down ratio 
between direct recruits and promotees were executive instructions having 
H no stat1itory force, the State could deviate from the ratio laid down. 
542 
..l 
\ 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA v. S.1HAKRE [HANSARIA,J.) 
543 
Dismissing the appeals, this Court 
A 
HELD : 1. The examination of the matter under Article 136 of the 
Constitution would not permit this Court to describe the view taken by the 
Tribunal so unreasonable as to merit iµterference with the same. The 
present was not a case about which it could be said that the quota rule had 
broken down. Therefore, the appointment of promotees has to be regarded B 
as in violation of rules. The material placed on record of the Tribunal 4oes 
not permit to accept the contention on behalf of the promotees that their 
promotions were not fortuitious. [544-H, 545-A, 546-F] 
Keshav Chandra Joshi v. Union of India, [1992) Suppl. 1 272; A.N. C 
Shehgal v. R.R. Sheoram, (1992) Suppl. 1 SCC 304; A. Janardhana v. Union 
of India, [1983) 3 SCC 601 and Narender Chadha v. Union of India, [1986) 
2 sec 157, referred to. 
State of West Bengal v.Aghore Nath Dey and Ors., [1993) 3 SCC 371 
and The Direct ReCTuit Class-II Engg. Officers Association v. State of D 
Maharashtra, AIR (1990) SC 1607, held inapplicable. 
2. The State having laid down the ratio, even though the same be by 
' way of executive instructions, it does not really lie in the mouth of the State 
to contend that the instructions having no statutory force could be deviated. 
(546-AJ E 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 3364 and 
3365 of 1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.10.94 of the Maharashtra 
/ 
Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur in T. A. No. 1275/92 (WP No. 743/90). 
F 
M.C. Bhandare, S.K. Dholakia and V.N. Ganpate, S.M. Yadav, S. 
Bhasme, H. Wahi and Uday Umesh Dalit for the appearing parties. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by : 
HANSARIA, J. The incessant dispute of inter-se seniority between 
direct recruits and promotees needs solution in these appeals relating to 
the incumbents belonging to the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forests 
in the Maharashtra Forests Service, Class- II. 
G 
2. Two of the direct recruits approached the Maharashtra Ad- H 
544 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1995) 2 S.C.R. 
A ministrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, making a grievance about their 
seniority qua some promotees. The Tribunal after examining the matter in 
great detail allowed the petition by quashing two of the State Government's 
decisions and directing the respondents before it to determine inter-se 
seni

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