VASANT KUMAR JAISWAL versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: [1988] 1 S.C.R. 73 · Decided: 08-09-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SABYASACHI MUKHERJI · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

), 
VASANT KUMAR JAISWAL 
A 
v. 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 
SEPTEMBER 8, 1987. 
[SABYASACHI MUKHARJI AND G.L. OZA, JJ.] 
B 
Service matter-Seniority on the basis of length of service-
Determination of-In the absence of any statutory rule or executive 
memorandum or order relating to determination of seniority. 
~ 
This was an appeal against the judgment and order of the High c 
Court of Madhya Pradesh, which in accordance with the well-settled 
principle laid down by this Court as also the High Court, held .that in 
~ 
the absence of any statutory rule or executive memorandum or order 
laying down the rule for determination of seniority in a gra4e, the 
normal rule applicable would be to determine the seniority on the basis 
of length of service. 
D 
Disposing of the Appeal, the Court, 
HELD: Counsel for the appellant contended that there were two 
rules in the case being Rules 12 (b) and 12 (c) of the M.P. Civil Services 
(General Conditions of Services) Rules, 1961, which governed the case. 
E 
In the proper perspective, these two rules did not apply in this 
case. T.he High Court was right in the view it took in the matter. 
This Court was unable to sustain the reasoning and view of the Single 
Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Umeshnarayan Mishra 
& Ors. v. The State of M.P. & Ors. in Civil Misc. Petition No. 181 
of 1983. [74C; 75F] 
F 
~ 
\. 
In view of the short length of service of the appellant, if the 
appellant made a representation, the respondent would consider the 
same in the light of the principles oflaw and equity. [7SG] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2189 G 
of 1987. 
~ 
From the Judgment and Order dated 21st January, 1985 of the 
Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc. Petition No. 1657 of 1984. 
V.A. Bobde, and D.N. Mishra for the Appellant. 
H 
73 
74 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1988] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
T.C. Sharma for the Respondent. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
r 
G 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
SABY ASACHI MUKHARJI, J. Special leave granted. 
This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the High 
Court of Madhya Pradesh which in accordance with the well settled 
principle of this Court as also the High Court held that in the absence 
of any statutory rule of executive memorandum or order laying down 
the rule for determination of seniority in a grade, the normal rule 
applicable would be to determine the seniority on the basis of length in 
service. Counsel for the appellant contends that in the instant case 
there were two rules being 12(b) and 12(c) of the M.P. Civil Services 
(General Conditions of Services) Rules 1961 governing the case. 
These rules read as follows:-
"(b). Promoted Government Servants: 
A promoted Government servant shall count his seniority 
from the date of his confirmation in the service to which he 
has been promoted and shall be placed in the gradation list 
immediately below the last confirmed member of that 
service but above all the probationers. 
Provided that where two or more promoted Govern-
ment servants are confirmed with effect from the same date 
the appointing authority shall determine their inter-se-
seniority in the service in which they are confirmed, with 
due regard to the order in which they were included in the 
merit list, if any prepared for determining their suitability 
for promotion, and their relative seniority in the lower 
service from which they have been promoted. 
( c) Officiating Government Servants:-
The inter-se-seniority of Government servants promoted to 
officiate in a higher service or a higher category of posts 
shall during the period of their officiation, be the same as 
that in their substantive service or grade irrespective of the 
dates on which they began to officiate in the higher service 
or grade; Provided that-
... 
-\ 
I 
V.K. JAISWAL v. STATE OF M.P. [MUKHARJI, J.] 
75 
(i) If they were selected for officiation from a list in which 
A 
the names of Government servants considered sui-
table for trial in or promotion to the higher service or 
grade were arranged in order of merit. Their inter-se-
seniority shall be determined in accordance with the 
order of merit in such list; 
(ii) the seniority of a permanent servant appointed to of-
ficiate in another service or post by transfer shall be 
determined adhoc by the appointing authority; 
Provided that the seniority proposed to be assigned to 
such Government servant shall be determined and inti-
mated to him in the order of appointment; 
(iii) where a pe

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