UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus MADRAS TELEPHONE SC & ST SOCIAL WELFARE ASSOCIATION

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 694 · Decided: 28-09-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.P. SINGH · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
v. 
MADRAS TELEPHONE SC & ST SOCIAL WELFARE ASSOCIATION 
ANDANR. 
SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 
[B.P. SINGH, S.B. SINHA AND P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Telegraph Engineering Service, Class-II-Seniority-Fixed pursuant 
to decision of High Court-Said dedsion attaining finality-Subsequently 
Supreme Court taking a contrary view• but protecting seniority and promotion 
granted to the employees like the petitioners therein-Application for 
clarification and similar protection by persons whose seniority was fixed on 
D the basis of High Court decision, but later affected by subsequent judgment 
of Supreme Court-Held, such of the applicants whose claim to seniority and 
consequent promotion on the basis of the principles laid down in the 
Allahabad High Court's judgment have been upheld or recognized by Court 
or Tribunal by judgment and order which have attained finality will not be 
adversely affected by the contrary view taken in the judgment **-Since the 
E rights of such applicants were determined in a duly constituted proceeding, 
which determination has attained finality, a subsequent judgment of a Court 
or Tribunal taking a contrary view will not adversely affect the applicants 
in whose cases the orders have attained finality -It is clarified that in this 
order the Court has not laid down any principle or law having universal 
F application, but has only clarified and given effect to an earlier judgment of 
this Court rendered in an extraordinary situation-Telegraph Recruitment 
Rules, 1966-Post and Telegraph Manual, Vol. JV-Paragraph 206. 
*Union of India v. Madras Telephone SC & ST Social Welfare 
Association, (20001 9 SCC 71; Junior Telecom Officers Forum and Ors. v. 
G Union of India and Ors., (19931 Supp. 4 sec 693; Telecommunication 
Engineering Service Association (India) and Anr. v. Union of India and Anr., 
(19941Supp.2 SCC 222 and **Union of India v. Madras Telephone SC & ST 
Social Welfare Association, (1997110 SCC 226, referred to. 
H 
694 
U.0.1. v. MADRAS TELEPHONE SC & ST SOCIAL WELFAREASSON. [B.P. SINGH,J.) 695 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 
I.A. No. 16. 
IN 
Civil Appeal No. 4339of1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 31.12.1986 of the Central 
Administrative Tribunal Madras in T.A. No. 909/1986 and R.A. No. 44/1987. 
A 
B 
L. Nageshwar Rao, P.P. Khurana, Dayan Krishnan, Nikhil Nayyar, Gatuam 
Narayan, R.K. Kapoor, Mukesh Kumar Verma, Govind Kaushik, Anita Sharma C 
(for Anis Ahmed Khan), Hemant Sharma, V.K. Verma, P. Parmeswaran, 
Subramonium Prasad and Arvind Kumar Sharma, for the appearing parties and 
Parmanand Lal in-Person. 
The Order of the Court was delivered by 
B,P. SINGH, J. This application for clarification has been filed by the 
applicants pursuant to the liberty granted to them by order of this Court dated 
July 18, 2003 in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.9189 of2003 
D 
in Promotee Telecom Engineers Forum & Ors. v. Secretary, Department of 
Telecommunications & Ors. The applicants pray that this Court may be 
pleased to clarify that the observations made by this Court in its judgment E 
and order reported in [2000] 9 SCC 71 Union of India v. Madras Telephone 
SC & ST Social Welfare Association dated April 26, 2000 protects the seniority 
and consequent promotion of persons who had judgments in their favour 
from th~ Central Administrative Tribunal duly confirmed by this Court which 
have thus attained finality. Their seniority and promotion, therefore, cannot F 
be disturbed in any manner whatsoever. The respondents who have revised 
the seniority list on 22nd, 26th and 28th March, 200 I respectively and 
purporting to give effect thereto issued the letter dated March 30, 200 I, must 
recognize the finality of the judgments in favour of the applicants and restore 
them to their original seniority. 
To appreciate the controversy it is necessary to refer to the background 
in which this question has arisen. 
The applicants are/were members of the Telegraph Engineering Service 
Class II. Before coming into force of the Telegraph Engineering Service Class 
G 
H 
696 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006) SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A II Recruitment Rules, 1966 framed in exercise of powers conferred by the 
proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the promotion from the 
post of erstwhile Engineering Supervisor Telecom (re-designated as Junior 
Engineer) to the post of Assistant Engineer was made in accordance with the 
instructions conta
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.