TELECOMMUNICATION ENGG. SERVICE ASSOCIATION (INDIA) AND ORS. versus U.O.I.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 84 · Decided: 13-05-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
TELECOMMUNICATION ENGG. SERVICE ASSOCIATION 
(INDIA) AND ORS. 
v. 
U.0.1. 
B 
MAY 13, 1994 
[KULDIP SINGH AND YOGESHWAR DAYAL, JJ.] 
Service Law-Promotion-Held, promotion to Telegraph Engineering 
Service Group B would be on the basis of passing the qualifying departmental 
C examination under para 206 of P & T Manual and not on basis of 
seniority-However, back wages payable only from date of actual working on 
higher post and not from date of notional promotion. 
The two questions which arose in these Special Leave Petitions and 
appeals by Special Leave from the Central Administrative Tribunal were 
D 
(1) Whether the applicants and persons similarly situated were entitled to 
promotion from the grade of Junior Engineers to the next higher grade in 
\he Telegraph Engineering Service Group B (Assistant Engineers and 
equivalent posts) on the basis of the year of passing the qualifying Depart· 
ment Examination envisaged in para 206 of the P & T Manual, and not on 
E the basis of their seniority. (2) Whether in the facts and circumstances 
they are entitled to relixation of inter se seniority on the said basis and 
promotions with retrospective effect together with back wages. Disposing 
of the appeals and Special Leave Petitions; this Court 
HELD : 1. In view of the decision of the Court in the case of Junior 
F 
Telecom. Officers Fomm v. Union of India, [1993] Supp. 4 SCC 693, the 
Junior Engineers are entitled to promotion on the basis of the year of 
passing the qualifying departmental examination under para 206 of the P 
& T Manual and not on the basis of seniority. [86-A] 
2. The Petitioners will get relixation of their seniority and notional 
G promotion with retrospective effect and would be entitled to fixation of 
their present pay which should not be less than that of those who are 
immediately below them. On the question whether they would be entitled 
to back wages from the date of notional promotion, tl1e Tribunal was 
justified in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case and the enormity 
H of the problem dealing with 10,000 persons, in declining to grant back 
84 
TELECOMMUNICATION ENGG. SERVICE ASSN. v. U.0.1. (DAYAL,J.j 85 
wages except with effect from the date they actually worked on the higher A 
posL [89-D-E-F) 
Junior Telecom Officers Forum v. Union of India, [1993) Supp. 4 SCC 
693 and Paluru Ramakrislmaiah v. Union of India, [1989) 2 SCC 541, relied 
on. 
Union of India v. K. V. Janakiraman, [1991) 4 SCC 109, distinguished. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C) 
No. 16698 of 1992. 
From the Judgment and order dated 29.6.92 of the Central Ad-
ministrative Tribunal, New Delhi in Review Application No. 195/92 in 0.A. 
No. 2667 of 1991. 
WITH 
C.A. Nos. 1814, 1813-13A, 1816-36, 1855-74, 2900/93, SLP (C) No. 
14575-84, 15984-85 of 1992. 
Altaf Ahmad, Additional Solicitor General, V.C. Mahajan, Ms. K. 
B 
c 
D 
Amreshwari P.P. Rao, Govnda Mukhoty C.S. Vaidyanathan Ms. Anil 
Katiyar, K.Swamy, T.V. Ratnarn, Ms. C.K. Sucharita, Naresh Kaushik, Ms. E 
Lalitha kaushik K.V. Mohan, G. Pral, Ms. Binu Tamta, Ms. Anil Katiyar, 
A.K. Sikri, Ms. Madhu Sikri and Ms. Meenakshi Arora for the appearing 
parties. 
• 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
F 
YOGESHW AR DAYAL, J. This Order will dispose of above said 58 
matters. However, we are taking the facts from Special Leave Petition No. 
16698 of 1992. This petition is directed against the judgment dated 29th 
June, 1992 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, 
New Delhi in Review applic&tion No. 195 of 1992 in QA No. 2667 of 1991. G 
This decision was rendered by the Principal Bench over a conflict of 
decision on two basic issues which arose for consideration, namely - (1) 
whether the applicants and persons similar to them are entitled to promo-
tion from the grade· of Jr. Engineers to the next higher grade in the 
Telegraph Engineering Service Group B (Assistant Engineers and H 
86 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A 
equivalent post) on the basis of the year of passing the qualifying 
Departmental Examination envisaged in para 206 of the P & T Manual and 
not on the basis of their respective seniority as had been adopted and 
followed by the respondents; and (2) whether in the facts and circumstan-
ces, they are entitled to refixation of inter se seniority on the said basis and 
B 
c 
promotions with retrospective effect together with back wages. After con~ 
sidering the judgment of t
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.