T. SHANTHARAM versus STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

Citation: [1995] 1 S.C.R. 274 · Decided: 16-01-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, S.C. SEN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
T. SHANTHARAM 
v. 
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. 
JANUARY 16, 1995 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND S.C. SEN, JJ.) 
Service law--Continued service of deputationist in the new depart-
ment-Order of absorption and promotion-Held valid. 
... 
·c 
The appellant was appointed in the Revenue Department of the State 
of Karnataka as second division clerk in Mangalore on October 8, 1963 
and sent on deputation to Food and Civil Supplies Department as Assis-
tant Civil Supplies Inspector on December 26, 1967. The appellant was 
promoted as Second Grade Civil Supplies Inspector on September 11, 
1968, a post equivalent to Sheristedar. 
D 
The 5th respondent was appointed as Second Division Clerk on 
January 22, 1965 in the Food Wing of the Revenue Department and was 
regularised as Second Division Clerk on September 30, 1971. He was 
promoted as Sheristedar on June 17, 1982. He was also promoted as 
Assistant Director. 
E 
When the appellant was sought to be repatriated from the Food 
Wing he filed an application befo~ the Administrative Tribunal in 1986 
which directed absorption of the appellant in the Food Department by 
order dated January 28, 1988. The appellant was absorbed in the l<'ood 
F 
Department and was placed above the 5th respondent and promoted as 
-r 
Assistant Director on January 1, 1980. 
In this appeal, the respondent contended that the transfer and 
deputation of the appellant in the Food Wing on a post higher than the 
., 
one held in the parent department was impermissible . 
G 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : Initially the appellant was mistakenly deputed to a higher 
,,._ 
post in the Food and Civil Supplies Department but since the appellant 
has discharged his duties and responsibilities to the satisfaction of all 
H concerned, it would be unjust to send him back 'to hold the post in the 
274 
-' 
T.SHANTHARAMv. STATE 
275 
present department which he is entitled to hold. The order of absorption A 
and promotion given to the appellant by the tribunal is upheld. (276-E-F] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 922 of 
1955. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 6.7.94 of the Karnataka Ad-
B . 
ministrative Tribunal, in A.No. 1954 of 1990. 
K. Madhava Reddy, G.K. Narasimha, K. V. Vijayakumar and Girish 
Ananthamurthy for the Appellant. 
Ram Jois and S.N. Bhat for the Respondent. 
M. Veerappa and K.H. Nobin Singh for the State of Karnataka. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted. 
The facts are telling that the appellant was appointed in the Revenue 
Department as Second Division Clerk in Mangalore on October 8, 1963. 
c 
D 
He was sent on deputation to the Food and Civil Supplies Department 
which was then part of Revenue Department as Assistant Civil Supplies E 
Inspector on December 26, 1967 and was promoted as Second Grade Civil 
Supplies Inspector on September 11, 1968 which is stated to be equivalent 
to Sheristedar. The 5th respondent Mr. R.K. Vasudev was appointed as a 
Second Division Clerk on January 22, 1965 in Food Wing of'the Revenue 
Department. Thereafter he was regularised as second Division Clerk on 
September 30, 1971 and was promoted as a Sheristedar on June 17, 1982. F 
From these facts, it is clear that at all levels of appointments and promo-
tions, the appellant was always senior to 5th respondent. But one fact that 
remain on record is that the appellant continued to be on deputation in 
the Food Wing of Revenue Department. When he was sought to be 
repatriated, the appellant filed Application No. 6432/86 before the Ad-
G 
ministrative Tribunal, Bangalore. The Tribunal by its order dated January 
28, 1988 directed absorption of the appellant in the Food Department as 
indicated in the order which reads thus : -
"Since the applicant is working in the Food and Civil Supplies 
Department since 1966 (about 32 years and he has not been given H 
A 
B 
276 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
{1995) 1 S.C.R. 
any proforma promotion in the Revenue Department and there 
are no valid ground to reject his request for absorption, we are of 
the considered opinion that the Applicant is entitled for a direction 
to the respondents to absorb him in the Department of Food and 
Civil Supplies in the post now held by him. It is ordered accordingly 
after quashing Annexure A." 
Subsequent thereto it would appear that the appellant was absorbed and 
· he was placed above the 5th respondent and also promoted on January 1, 
1980 as a Assistant Director. It would also appear from the 

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