U.P. JAL NIGAM AND ORS. versus DURGA PRASAD SINGH AND ORS.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 277 · Decided: 02-12-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, N. VENKATACHALA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

U.P.JAL NIGAM AND ORS. 
'\'· 
DURGA PRASAD SINGH AND ORS. 
DECEMBER 2, 1994 
[ K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Service Law:-UP.Loca/ Self Government Engineering Department 
Seniority-Assistant Engineers 
appointed on 
ad-hoc 
basis-Inter 
seniority-Determination 
of-Record not 
traceable-F.LR 
filed-
Directions to newly constituted Selection Committee and Police Issued 
The respondents were temporarily appointed on ad-hoc basis as 
Assistant Engineers in U.P Local Self Government Engineering 
Department. As regards their inter-se seniority, the matter reached the 
High Court, which directed the preparation of fresh seniority on the 
basis of merit list of the candidates. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
However, the record could not be traced out and in its absence, as 
suggested by the High Court, a fresh Selection Committee was 
constituted, the legality of which was challenged before the High Court. 
The appellant was directed by the High Court to re-do the merit list of 
only of such Assistant Engineers whose services were regularised by the 
Selection Committee constituted in March, 1986 on the basis of their E 
performance as per records available upto December 26, 1977. Hence 
this appeal by U.P. Jal Nigam. 
Allowing the appeals, this Court 
HELD: 1.1. It is clear that the merit list filed, had obviously been F 
made by some of the parties and produced before the Tribunal and 
when it was circulated, the adversely affected persons had objected to 
that merit list as well as its genuineness. In consequence, the list was 
ignored and a committee came to be appointed. The appellants have 
also specifically stated in the counter affidavit filed in the High Omrt G 
that after investigation to dig out the record, they could not trace out 
the record and so they lodged an F. I. R. for investigation as to the 
persons responsible for destruction of the record and the matter is 
under investigation. Under these circumstances, the appellants 
obviously had chosen the last option given by the High Court in the 
earlier order and constituted a fresh selection committee to consider H 
277 
278 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1994] SUPP. 6 S.C.R 
A 
the claims of the candidates for preparation of the inter-se seniority in 
the order of merit. Under these circumstances, the High Court was not 
right in issuing the writ of mandamus. (281 E to G) 
1.2 The committee would go into the question of inter-se seniority 
and prepare the list according to merit and give the report within a 
B 
period of two months from the date of the receipt of this order. The 
police would make a thorough investigation to find out the persons 
responsible for destruction of the record and take appropriate action 
according to law. (281 H, 282 A] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No.9214of1994 
C 
Etc. 
From the Judgment and order dated 18.3.94 of the Allahabad High 
Court in W.P. No 72 (SB) of 1994. 
Rajeev Dhawan, I. M. Quddusi, R.B. Misra and P. K. Chakrabarty for 
D 
the Appellants. 
E 
F 
G 
H 
Dr. N. M. Ghatate, A. S. Pundhir, Ms. Sandhya Goswamy and N. A. 
Siddiqui for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered: 
Leave Granted in SLPs No. 8106 and 8264of1994. 
These appeals by special leave arise from the judgments of the 
Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad in W.P.No 72 (SB)/94 and· 
114 (SB)/94 dated 18-3-93. The facts are that the respondents were 
temporarily appointed on ad-hoc basis as Assistant Engineers in U.P. Local 
Self Govt. Engineering Department. On an earlier occasion, when writ 
petition was filed, the High Court adjudicated the dispute and had observed 
in its order dated January 14, 1993, in W.P.No. 8504/87 at paragraphs 17 
and 18 thereof thus : 
"It follows from the conclusion arrived at above that the Jal 
Nigam must publish the merit list prepared by the Selection 
Committee and take necessary action for determining 
seniority according to that list. The merit list could not be 
produced by the Jal Nigam before the Tribunal. There are 
three alternatives. First that the original merit list is traced out 
by the Jal Nigam and is acted upon after considering 
U.P.JAL NIGAM v. D. P. SINGH 
279 
objections, if any, which may be made against the same by A 
the concerned Assistant Engineers. The second alternative is 
that if the original merit list is not traceable, an attempt is 
made to reconstruct and publish the same and after inviting 
objections thereto from the concerned Assistants Engineers 
and 

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