UNION OF INDIA AND ORS versus C.N. PONNAPPAN

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 220 · Decided: 05-12-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.C. AGRAWAL, G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 
v. 
C.N. PONNAPP AN 
DECEMBER 5, 1995 
[S.C. AGRAWAL AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
Seivice Law : 
Transfer of employee on compassionate ground;--Seivice rendered in 
C earlier unit-Held, has to be counted as experience for promotion. 
Practice and Procedure : 
Central Administrative Tribunal-One Bench not inclined to agree wiOi 
the view taken by another co-ordinate Bench-Course to be adopted-fu:-
D plained. 
On the question whether an employee, transferred from one unit to 
other on compassionate grounds and, as such, placed at the bottom of the 
seniority list, can have his service in the former unit counted as experience 
for the purpose of promotion in the latter unit, the Madras Bench of the 
E Central Administrative Tribunal decided in favour of the transferred 
employee, whereas the Bangalore Bench decided against such an employee. 
Later, a Full Bench of the Tribunal agreed with the view of the Madras 
Bench. The present three appeals came to be filed against the decisions 
rendered by the Full Bench and the Madras Bench of the Tribunal. 
F 
Dismissing the appeals, this Court 
HELD : t. The Tribunal has rightly interpreted the rules as they 
stood at the relevant time, and has rightly held that the service rendered 
at the place from where the employee has been transferred has to be 
G counted as experience for the purpose of eligibility for promotion at the 
place where he has been transferred. The said service being regular service 
in the grade cannot be ignored only on the ground that it was not rendered 
at the place of transfer. Nor does the fact that the employee was placed at 
the bottom of the seniority list as a result of transfer wipe out his servi~e 
H at the place from where he was transferred. [223-B-A) 
220 
U.0.1. v. C.N. PONNAPf AN 
221 
2. Since the Bangalore Bench and the Madras Bench were the A 
coordinate Benches of the Tribunal, the Bangalore Bench, when it felt 
inclined to take a view different from that taken by the Madras Bench, 
should have referred the question for consideration by a larger Bench. 
[222-B] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil appeal No. 1221 of B 
1987 Etc. 
From the Judgment aud Order dated 20.6.86/28.8.86 of the Central 
Administrative Tribunal, Madras in T.P. No. 770/86 O.P. No. 6288 of 1984. 
KN. Shukla, Hemani Sharma, Ms. Anil Katiyar, P. Parmeswaran for 
C 
the ,A.ppellants. 
K.M.K. Nair for the Respondent. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
These three appeals raise a common question for consideration. The 
question is whether an employee who is transferred from one unit to other 
D 
on compassionate grounds, and, as a result, is placed at the bottom of the 
seninrity list can have his service in the earlier unit from where he has been 
transferred counted as experience for the purpose of promotion in the unit 
where he is transferred. There was a difference of opinion amongst the E 
Benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 
'the Tribunal') on this question. In C.N. Poonappan v. Union of India & 
Ors. (Transfer Application No. 770 of 1986) decided on June 20, 1986, 
which has given rise to Civil Appeal No. 1221 of 1987, the Madras Bench 
of the Tribunal has taken the view that though on transfer on compas-
F 
sionate grounds the employee loses his seniority and is placed al the 
bottom of the seniority list at the transferred place but for the purpose 
promotion his earlier service in the unit form where he \vas transferred is 
not wiped out and the said service has to be treated as experience for the 
purpose of his eligibility for such promotion and if he is found eligible then G 
the matter of promotion has to be considered on the basis of seniority at 
the transferred place. The Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in S. Abdul 
Khayaum & Ors. v. Union of India (Applications Nos. 1282, 1283 and 1284 
of 1986) decided on SeptembetyO, 1986 has, however, not agreed with the 
said view of the Madras Bench o~the Tribunal in Poonappan's case (supra) 
and has held that an employee who is transferred on compassionate H 
222 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A grounds and is placed at the bottom of the seniority list at the place where 
he is transferred cannot have his earlier service at the place from where 
he was transferred counted as experience for the purpose of eligibility for 
promotion. Since the Bangalore Bench and the ivladras Bench were co-or-
dinate Benches of the Tri

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