UNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus N.R. PARMAR & ORS.

Citation: [2012] 13 S.C.R. 555 · Decided: 27-11-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 8 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

(2012] 13 S.C.R. 555 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
v. 
N.R. PARMAR & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 7514-7515 of 2005 etc.) 
NOVEMBER 27, 2012 
[D.K. JAIN AND JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Service Law - Seniority - lnter-se-seniority - Between 
direct recruit and promotee Income Tax Inspectors -
Applicability of 'quota' and 'rota' principle - Vacancies for the C 
year 1993-94 required to be filled up by promotion as well as 
direct recruitment - Simultaneously refeffed to Departmental 
Promotion Committee and to Staff Selection Commission 
respectively - Appointment of promotees prior to the direct 
recruits as the selection process for direct recruits could not D 
be completed within the recruitment year - Determination of 
date of seniority of the direct recruits - Plea of promotees that 
the date of seniority of the direct recruits should be from the 
date of their actual appointment, primarily placing reliance on 
Office Memorandum dated 7.2.1986 - Held: The date of E 
seniority of direct recruits could not be the date of their actual 
appointment, but would be the date of initiation of process of 
recruitment - The general principles for determining inter se 
seniority between promotees and direct recruits was provided 
in the Office Memorandum dated 22.11.1959 - The Office 
F 
Memorandum dated 7. 2. 1986 only introduced modification in 
respect of the vacancies which could not be filled and were 
carried forward and had to be filled later through a subsequent 
process of selection - In the instant case, the advertised 
vacancies were not carried forward vacancies - Direct recruits 
G 
have to be interspaced with promotees of the same 
recruitment year. 
Interpretation of Statutes - When the language used in 
555 
H 
556 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2012] 13 S.C.R. 
A a statute is unambiguous and on a plain meaning being given 
to the words, the end result is neither arbitrary, nor irrational 
nor contrary to the object of the statute, the words used should 
be given effect to. 
B 
The instant appeals and transferred cases, involved 
the dispute of inter-se seniority between the direct recruit 
and promotee income Tax Inspectors. The question to be 
decided was whether determination of the seniority of the 
direct recruits would be with reference to the date of their 
actual appointment, or the date of arising of the direct 
C recruit vacancies, or the date of initiation of the process 
of recruitment, or the date when the Staff Selection 
Commission made recommendations for filling up direct 
recruit vacancies. 
D 
E 
The rival parties agreed that the seniority dispute was 
liable to be determined on the basis of Office Memoranda 
dated 7.2.1986 and 3.7.1986 issued by the Department of 
Personnel and Training read with the clarificatory Office 
Memoranda and Office Notes. 
Allowing the appeals and the transferred cases, the 
Court 
HELD: 1. General principles for determining seniority 
in Central services have been laid down in an annexure 
F to an Office Memorandum dated 22.11.1959 issued by the 
Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs. Under the 
OM dated 22.11.1959 inter se seniority between the 
promotees and direct recruits was based on the "quota" 
and "rota" principle. The OM dated 22.11.1959, was 
G modified by an Office Memorandum dated 7 .2.1986, 
issued by the Government of India, Department of 
Personnel and Training. The modification introduced 
through the OM dated 7.2.1986 was to redress a situation, 
wherein vacancies of one of the sources were kept (or 
H remained) unfilled during the process of selection, and 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. N.R. PARMAR & ORS. 
557 
the unfilled vacancies, had to be filled up through "later'' 
A 
examinations or selections. For the determination of 
seniority, in the contingency wherein the process of 
recruitment resulted in filling the vacancies earmarked for 
the two sources of recruitment, the manner of 
determining inter se seniority between promotees and 
8 
direct recruits, expressed in the OM dated 22.11.1959 
remained unaltered. But where the vacancies could not 
be filled up, and unfilled vacancies had to be filled up 
"later" through a subsequent process of selection, the 
manner of determining inter se seniority between C 
promotees and direct recruits, was modified. The O.M. 
dated 7 .2.1986, was followed by another Office 
Memorandum issued by the Government of India, 
Department of Personnel and Training, dated 3.7.1986. 
The purpose of this O.M. was to "con

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