UNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL & ORS. ETC.ETC.

Citation: [2019] 2 S.C.R. 317 · Decided: 08-01-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
317
       UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
v.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL & ORS. ETC.ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos.175-176 of 2019)
JANUARY 08, 2019
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.]
Service Law – Regularization – Group ‘D’ workers engaged
on casual basis at the Institute in question (under the administrative
control of Comptroller and Auditor General of India) not regularized
despite long years of service – Central Administrative Tribunal
mandated preparation of seniority list and for working out the
possibility of regularizing services of the casual workers – Order
affirmed by the High Court – Casual workmen moved Tribunal stating
that despite the specific directions of the Tribunal to observe
seniority, persons below in seniority regularized – Tribunal directed
the authorities to accord the benefit of regularization to the casual
workers as accorded to their juniors – Challenged by Union of
India – High Court confirmed the order, also directing that even if
posts in the Institute are not available, casual workers who claimed
regularization be considered in other places where Group ‘D’ posts
are available – Propriety of – Held: Direction to consider the casual
workers for regularization in other establishments was not justified
– Original order passed by the Tribunal did not contain mandamus
for regularization – Order mandated that seniority list should be
maintained by the Union of India and that the possibility of
regularizing the casual workmen at the Institute should be considered
against existing and future vacancies in Group ‘D’ posts – Acting
on the basis of the decision of the Tribunal, affirmed by the High
Court, Union of India proceeded to formulate seniority list and, in
fact, regularized at least four individuals – Action of selecting
juniors for regularization, by-passing in the process, persons who
had put in longer years of service was manifestly unfair and
arbitrary – Picking up individuals for regularization, while ignoring
seniors shows that a favoured few have been rewarded –
Arbitrariness in the conduct of the authorities at the Institute is writ
large – Having decided to implement the decision of the Tribunal,
 [2019] 2 S.C.R. 317
 317
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
318
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 2 S.C.R.
affirmed by the High Court, the Union of India must follow a rational
principle and abide strictly by the seniority list in proceeding to
regularize the workmen concerned – Such persons who are
available for regularization on the basis of vacancies existing at
present, be considered in accordance with law   –  Indian Audit and
Accounts Department Multi-Tasking Staff Recruitment Rules, 2011.
Group ‘D’ workers, engaged on casual basis at the Regional
Training Institute, claimed before the Central Administrative
Tribunal that despite long years of service they were not
regularized. The Tribunal inter alia issued directions for working
out the possibility of regularizing services of the casual workers.
The order was affirmed by the High Court. Casual workmen
moved the Tribunal stating that despite the specific directions of
the Tribunal to observe seniority, persons below in seniority were
regularized. The Tribunal directed the authorities to accord the
benefit of regularization to the casual workers as accorded to
their juniors. High Court while confirming the order of the
Tribunal directed that even if posts in the Institute are not
available, the casual workers who claimed regularization be
considered in other places where Group ‘D’ posts are available.
Hence the present appeals.
Disposing of the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1  In the present case, the original order passed
by the Tribunal did not contain a mandamus for regularization.
The order mandated that a seniority list should be maintained by
the Union of India and that the possibility of regularizing the casual
workmen at the Regional Training Institute should be considered
against existing and future vacancies in Group ‘D’ posts.  Acting
on the basis of the decision of the Tribunal, which was affirmed
by the High Court, the Union of India proceeded to formulate a
seniority list and, in fact, regularized at least four individuals.
The judgment of the High Court attained finality. The Tribunal
justifiably held that the action of selecting juniors for
regularization, by-passing in the process, persons who had put in
longer years of service was manifestly unfair and arbitrary.  This
direction of the Tribunal has been affirmed by the

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