# • 'r-·· . 431 .A G.S. LAMBA & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

- **Citation:** [1985] 3 S.C.R. 431
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1983-06-30
- **Bench:** D.A; Desai, v. KHALID
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/r-431-a-g-s-lamba-ors-v-union-of-india-ors-8953
- **Pages:** 30

## Headnote

,c
·cons(itution of India, 1950 Articles 14 and 16
Service-Constitution of-Recruitment from more then one source and
quota prescribed for each source-Quota rule of recruitment inter linked with
rota rule of seniority,__iJeviation and departure in implementation of service
rule-Interference whether artises.
f!D
Indian Foreign Service, Branch·•n• (Recruitment, Cadre," Seniority and
Promotion) Rules 1964,
Rules 13,21 (4) and 25 (i) (ii) & 2F and 29(a).
Pro1notees and direct recruits-Fixation of seniorty-Promotees promOted to
substantive vacancies on temporary
basis-Continuous officiation whether
confers advantage of seniority over-later recruits.
E
Power of relaxation of statutory 5ervice rules-Fai/Ure to record reasons
-:Whether quota fixed for direct recruitment catJ be' r"elaxi!d.
The Indian Foreign Service Branch 'B' was constitued in
1956~ The
statutory rules Indian Foreign Service Branch 'B' (Requitment, Cadre, Seniority
and Promotion) Rules, 1964 came into force from May 6, 1964.
Commencing
from the advent of the Rules, recruitment from three sources were made (i)
direct recruitment on the result of a competitive examination held by the Union
Public Service Commission,
(ii) substantive appointment of persons included
in the selective list promoted on the basis of a limited· c9mpetitive examination
held by the U.P.S.C. and (iii) Promotion on the basis of seniority.
Rule 13 provided for recruitment to posts in the integrated Grades II
and III of the General cadre, and that temporary vacancies shall be filled by
appointment of persons included in the selec"t list.
Rule 21 laid down a
general. provision for fixing of seniority, while sub-rule (4) thereof, prOvided
that persons promoted or recruited on the basis of an earlier selection or recuitroent; shall be senior to those promoted or recruited on the basis of an earlier
,F
G
'H
B
'F
·~G
.,H
.>.
SuPR~Mll COURf R~POR fs
ti 9~51 3 s c.fL
selection or recruitment, shall be senior to those promoted or recruited. on the
basis of a subsequent selection or recruitn1ent.
Rule 22 to 24 provided for
seniority inter-se of direct recruits, and seniority inter·se of officers promoted
to a grade on the recommendations of a departmental promotion committee.
Rule 25 provided for seniority inter-se of the officers appointed to a grade from
different sources.
By a notification dated February 12, 1975, Rule 13 was amended to
provide that recruitment to the three different sources of integrated Grades
II and III to be: (i) !/6th of the
sub~antive vacancies to be filled in by direct
recruitment, (ii) 33!% of the remaining 5/6 of the vacancies to be filled on
the basis of results of the limited competitive examination, and (iii) the remai·
ning vacancies to be filled in by promotion on the basis of seniority.
The petitioners in the Writ Petitions were selected by the Union Public Ser
vice Commission according to the merits obtained at the examination of Assis~
tants conducted for the purpose for appointment to the post, and ·allocated to
the _Ministry of External Affairs.
After the initial constitution of the service in
.1956, they \\'.!?re offered. an Option whether they would like to join the I.F.S.
Branch 'B' in grade IV.
They opted and were inducted into the service. Later,
they were promoted between 1976 and 1979 ffom grade IV to the- integrated
grades II and III .
The Government of India published a seniority list of the
integrated grades II and III as on June 25, 1979 and before objections taken by
.the petitioners to the seniority list were dealt with, another seniority list was
. published on June 30 1983.
The petitioners assailed· the aforesaid seniority lists as violative of the
constitutionally guaranteed equality of opportunity in the matter of public
service in asmuchas direct recruits who crune into the .service long after the
dePa.rtmental . pre:m~t~s ~ere regularly promoted have been assigned seniority
over the earlier prornoted departmental promotees.
It was further contended,

## Text

_Characters 0–39,847 of 71,286. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39847 for what follows._

•
'r-··
. 431
.A
G.S. LAMBA & ORS.
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
B
March !21985
[D.A; DESAI AND v. KHALID, JJ.]
,c
·cons(itution of India, 1950 Articles 14 and 16
Service-Constitution of-Recruitment from more then one source and
quota prescribed for each source-Quota rule of recruitment inter linked with
rota rule of seniority,__iJeviation and departure in implementation of service
rule-Interference whether artises.
f!D
Indian Foreign Service, Branch·•n• (Recruitment, Cadre," Seniority and
Promotion) Rules 1964,
Rules 13,21 (4) and 25 (i) (ii) & 2F and 29(a).
Pro1notees and direct recruits-Fixation of seniorty-Promotees promOted to
substantive vacancies on temporary
basis-Continuous officiation whether
confers advantage of seniority over-later recruits.
E
Power of relaxation of statutory 5ervice rules-Fai/Ure to record reasons
-:Whether quota fixed for direct recruitment catJ be' r"elaxi!d.
The Indian Foreign Service Branch 'B' was constitued in
1956~ The
statutory rules Indian Foreign Service Branch 'B' (Requitment, Cadre, Seniority
and Promotion) Rules, 1964 came into force from May 6, 1964.
Commencing
from the advent of the Rules, recruitment from three sources were made (i)
direct recruitment on the result of a competitive examination held by the Union
Public Service Commission,
(ii) substantive appointment of persons included
in the selective list promoted on the basis of a limited· c9mpetitive examination
held by the U.P.S.C. and (iii) Promotion on the basis of seniority.
Rule 13 provided for recruitment to posts in the integrated Grades II
and III of the General cadre, and that temporary vacancies shall be filled by
appointment of persons included in the selec"t list.
Rule 21 laid down a
general. provision for fixing of seniority, while sub-rule (4) thereof, prOvided
that persons promoted or recruited on the basis of an earlier selection or recuitroent; shall be senior to those promoted or recruited on the basis of an earlier
,F
G
'H
B
'F
·~G
.,H
.>.
SuPR~Mll COURf R~POR fs
ti 9~51 3 s c.fL
selection or recruitment, shall be senior to those promoted or recruited. on the
basis of a subsequent selection or recruitn1ent.
Rule 22 to 24 provided for
seniority inter-se of direct recruits, and seniority inter·se of officers promoted
to a grade on the recommendations of a departmental promotion committee.
Rule 25 provided for seniority inter-se of the officers appointed to a grade from
different sources.
By a notification dated February 12, 1975, Rule 13 was amended to
provide that recruitment to the three different sources of integrated Grades
II and III to be: (i) !/6th of the
sub~antive vacancies to be filled in by direct
recruitment, (ii) 33!% of the remaining 5/6 of the vacancies to be filled on
the basis of results of the limited competitive examination, and (iii) the remai·
ning vacancies to be filled in by promotion on the basis of seniority.
The petitioners in the Writ Petitions were selected by the Union Public Ser
vice Commission according to the merits obtained at the examination of Assis~
tants conducted for the purpose for appointment to the post, and ·allocated to
the _Ministry of External Affairs.
After the initial constitution of the service in
.1956, they \\'.!?re offered. an Option whether they would like to join the I.F.S.
Branch 'B' in grade IV.
They opted and were inducted into the service. Later,
they were promoted between 1976 and 1979 ffom grade IV to the- integrated
grades II and III .
The Government of India published a seniority list of the
integrated grades II and III as on June 25, 1979 and before objections taken by
.the petitioners to the seniority list were dealt with, another seniority list was
. published on June 30 1983.
The petitioners assailed· the aforesaid seniority lists as violative of the
constitutionally guaranteed equality of opportunity in the matter of public
service in asmuchas direct recruits who crune into the .service long after the
dePa.rtmental . pre:m~t~s ~ere regularly promoted have been assigned seniority
over the earlier prornoted departmental promotees.
It was further contended,
that the seniority list of June 30, 1983 was objectionable as it leaves blank
spaces for fliture recruits either as direct recruits or by limited departmental
. examination and who are yet to come into the service to be placed over promo·
tees·like,the petitioners _wJ:io were already in service for a long time.
The
seniority lists having bCen drawn up on the principles of quota-rota and on fhe
.facts of the case and the relevant rules were violative of Articles 14 ·and 16.
The writ petitions were cont_ested by the Central Governments contending
that the seniority lists were drawn up in accordance with the principles governing
seniority in the grade as per Rule 25, and that were recruitment to a service was
. from more than one source and each source was assigned a quota of vacancies,
-the siniority was to be determined according to rota keepirig in view the
available vacancies to each source. While departmental promotion is made after
the Depa"rtmentill Promotion Committee makes recommendations recruitment
"through examiDation is ti.me consuming there is a time gap between publication
' of results and joining of candidates and it is therefore not practically possible
-· to striCtly adhere to the quota in any particular year.
The Administration
•
,
•
•
~·
"
. •!
a:i WlaA v. lrntON
· ovel'C11iie this difficulty by rotation of· vacancies cnsurinz that over a period of
~. A
; time the required quota was fully met.
Bia~ spaces _were left in the seniority
liSt-for _giving seniority to persons who have still nOt joined service and are
likely to join at an . uncertain date. This process , would not push down the
· ~niority of the petitioners as they would occupy the same serial No •. in the
seniority list.
When the Wrlt Petitions were being heard, Respondent No. 26 appeared
and contested 'the claim Of thC petitioners contending that all Assistants in
Gcide IV who put in _ tbC required numbei of Years of servicC were eligibte·for
participating in . the_ limited ·departmental : examination; promotions baSed on
· the result ot such an exanlination would therCfore not be violative of Art. 14
,. Delay in holding of the examination cannot wo"rk to the disadvantage of those.
who had taken the examination and qualified for promotion and therefore they
· ', should be accommodated in the vacancies· \vhich had come into existence and
where available for the quota from -the date the vacancies came into existence .•
:-.The two ·1sCniority·- lists were consequently valid and in consonance with the
statutory niles. · ·.
-
Allowing the Writ Petitions,
HELD :
(1) · The impugned seniority lists challenged by the petitioners
have been·· drwan up in violation ·-of the provisions of Arts. 14and16 of_the
Constitution and therefore· they are quashed.
The first respondent is directed
to draw up fresh seniority list. All promotions - granted since the filing o(. the
petitions must be readjusted.
(460B·CJ
·B
D
•
E
Jn the inst.int. case;; _direct"- recruitment . had not been made for; years.
LiinitCd Competitive CxaminatioD. had atS:o not been held for years.. Promotions
from the select list had been presumably in excess of the quota but the promo·
,- ' tees were appoint"ed to substantive vacancies in the service and had been holding
the posts as in the case of the petitioners for over 6 to .8 years. The promotions
were not styled as temporary, adhoc or stop gap.
The impugned seniority
... F
lists"were dnlwn up by rotatina: vacancies for each source, ana jf no_ recruitment
was made from that source in a given year, the place in the list available to
that source was kept open and a later recruit at any distance of.time from- that
source would be assigned that place over persons who were already recruited
from other sources and would be working in_ substantive vacancies •. The direct
; recruit thus scores a march over a promoteC. . The seniority list is consequently
: , violative of Articles 14 and 16 and therefore deserves to be quashed.
·
.-: 1 ·c _
,.
(453E ; C-DJ
(2)
Once the promotees were promoted regularly to substantive
vacancies Cveri if temporary unless "therC was a cha"oce of their demotion to the
- lower cadre, there_·continuous-·omCiation confers on -them an' advantage of
bCing senior to the later recruits under Rule 21(4)~ If by the enormous depar·
lure or by the power to relax, the -quota"iu!C:·was not adhered to,- the rota rule
,, H
B
c
D
E
H
ti 9ssi 3 s.c.R.
for inter-se seniority as prescribed ·in Ru~e 25(i){ii) ·cannot"-be given.effect." Jn
the absence of any other valid principle of seniority it is well established' that
continuous officiation in the cadre, grade or service will provide a ·valid
principle of seniority.
The seniority lists having not been prepared on this
principle are liable to be quashed and set aside.
[459G-H ; 460A]
(3)
Where recruitment to a service or a cadre is from more than one
source, the controlling · authority can prescribe quota for each source.
where
the quota is prescribed, a rule of seniority by rotating thC: vacancies can be a
valid ru1e-for seniority.
However if the rule of seniority is inextricably inte~
twined with the quota rule and there is enormous deviation from the quoia
rule, it would be unjust, inequitous and unfair to give effect to the rota rule.
!45613-C]
...
A. Janardhana v. Union of India & Ors. [1983] 2 SCR 936. B.S. Gupta
v. Union of India [1975] Suppl.
SCR 491., A.K. Subramana v. Union of
India [1973] 2 SCR 979., P.S. Mohal and Others v. Union of Indio & Ors.
AIR 1984 SC 1291., O.P. Sing/a and Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. AIR 1984
SC 1595., S.C. Jaisinghania v. Union of India & Ors. [1967] 2 SCR 703.,
Bishan Sarllp Gupta etc v. Union of India & Ors.
(1~75} l SCR 104, referred
to.
(4) What is known in service Jurisprudence as seniority according to
continuous officiation in the cadre from the grade has been statutorily recognised
in Rule 21(4).
This is in tune with fairplay and justice and ensures equality
as mandated by Art. 16.
[454E]
(5)
A block o,f recruits in a given year coming from three independent
sources may be integrated inter-se according to quota and rota. The block in a
subsequent year would be always junior to the bloc of recruits in the earlier
years. This is how Rules 21(4) and 25(i) (ii) can be harmoniously read and it is
unquestionable that they operate in two different situations and both have to be
given effect to.
[455A-B]
(6) Rule 29(A) confers power to relax any of the provisions of the 1964
Rules· and this also comprehends Rule 13(1) which prescribes quota.
When
the power to relax any Of the provisions is exercised, the ContrOlling Authority
must be of the opinion that it is necessary of expedient so to do for reasons
to be recorded in writing.
Failure to record reasons will not invalidate the
exercise of power.
Once the power ·to relax a: mandatory rule exists and act_ion
in derogation Or the rule has been repeatedly taken year after·year~ it·WOuld· be
a permisible inference that the action was taken in relaxation of the rule for
which the power exists.
(457B-C}
Bachand Singh and Anr, v. Union of India & Ors. [1972] 3 SCR 898.,
Montreal Street Railway Company v. Normandi, AIR 1977 P.C. 142., State of
U.P. v. Manboden Lal Srivastava (1958} SCR 533, N.K. Chandan .and Ors. v.
State af Gujarat [1977] 1 SCR 1037, referred to.
It s. w.iBA v. UNION (besal, },)
435
,1 _.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Writ Petilion (Civil) No. 13248 lO 13257 of 1983 ·
L·
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)
Madan Bhatia and Sushi/ Kumar for the Petitioners.
N.C. Talukdar, M.K. Ramamurthy, . R.N. Poddar, A.K. Nag,.
and M.A. Rehman for the Respondents.
. •.
Respondent No. 26 in person.
,,
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DESAI, J. We are back to square one. The same rigmarole
of unending disputes as to inter-se seniority between jlromotees, ,
direct recruits and recruits as per the result of the limited competi' :·
tive examination with quota-rota as the guiding star for determinfog'
inter se seniority are put in the lap of the Court. _
This time the service is the Indian For.eign Service Branch. 'B'
('IFS 'B' for short). This service. was constituted by the memo ran-: .
dum of Govt. of India, Ministry of External Affairs dated July)6, .,
1956. The service was consisted of two cadres; a general cadre and
two sub cadres l) Stenographer sub-cadre and 2) Cypher sub-cadre
forming what is styled as special cadre. The general cadre com,.
prises6 ·grades. Various provisions were made in the, Memorandum,
for recruitment to various grades. Para V proVided for general
conditions of eligibility for appointment in the service at the initial :
constitntion. Para VI provided that recruitment to grade I, !Land
III of the general cadre will be made on the recommendations of
~the _Senior Selection_ Board . of which the ~h.airman ~Ill b~ the·
Chairman of the Unton Pubhc Service Comm1ss10n or h1s.nom10ee.
•
Selec.tion to other grades will be made by the Junior Selection Boa;d
in consultation with Union Public Service Commission. Para VIII-..
proviped for in\er se seniority of persons selected . for grades I, n.
and III.of the general cadre. Appendix to the Memoran<l_um .sets . -
out sanctioned strength of posts in various· grades of1FS. 'B' and 'the.
scales :of:PJ!Y attached to each grade.
A /.
B
c,
E
F
G·-·'
Petitioners were selected by the Union Public Service Commis- ·
siori according to the merits obtained at the examination conducted• ·
for the purpose in 1955 for appointment to the post 9f Assistant, ·
and were allocated-to the Ministry of External Affairs. After' ihc ··
H ii
.
'
-_.·_ .....
A'
B
c
0 t,C
E
F
G .~
H
sui!R!lME CdiiRf REPORtS
h9ssj 3 s.c.it
initial constitution of the service in 1956 petitioners were offerred
an option whether they would like to join IFS 'B' in Grade IV at
the time of its initial constitution. The memorandum constituting
the service provided that future maintenance of the service would
be governed by the rules to be promulgated for the purpose by the
Central Govt. Accordingly by its notification dated May 6,1964,
the Govt. of India, Ministry of External Affairs in exercise of all
the powers conferred by Art.
309, promulgated Indian Foreign
Service Branch 'B' (Recruitment, Cadre, Seniority and Promotion)
Rules, 1964 ('1964 Rules' for short). By the afore-mentioned rules,
grades II and III were integrated and the grade was styled as integrated grade II and III in general cadre.
Petitioners came to be 'promoted between 1976-1979 from
grade IV to integrated grade II and III. The Govt.
of India published. a seniority list of officers in the integrated grade II and. III of
the general cadre of'IFS 'B' as on June 25,1979. Petitioners con-.
tend that the seniority list is violative of the constitutionally guaranteed 'equality of opportunity in the matter of public service· inas
much as direct recruits who came into service long after the deparimenfal promotees were regularly promoted to the aforementioned·
grade have been assigned seniority over thO"earlier promoted depart- :
mental promotees. Before objections taken by the petitioners to ..
the seniority list were dealt with the Central Govt. in supersession :
of seniority list dated June 25,1979 published another seniority list
of the officers in integrated grade II and III of IFS 'B' as on June
30, 1983. Petitioners contend that the seniority list dated June·'
30,1983 suffers from the same vice and is all the more objectionable
inasmuch as it leaves blank spaces for future recruits either as .
\ direct rdcruits or by limited departmental examination and who
are yet to come into service to be placed over promotees like the .
petitioners who have already been in service for a long time. ·The
petitioners contend that the impugned seniority list appears to have
been drawn up on the principle of quota-rota and that in the facts
of this case and the relevant rules it is violative of Art. · 14 and
16 of the Constitution. Petitioners also assert that if Rule 25(1)
(ii) i~ not. construed harmoniously with Rule 2i of the 1964
Rules, Rule 25(1) (ii) would be violative of
the gurantee. of
equal~ty enshrined in Art.
16. To be precise, the contention is that
where there is recruitment to a cadre from more than one source
and the recruitment has to conform to the quota prescribed for each
source, simultaneously interlinking the inter-se seniority in respect·
•
•
b. S. tAMBA v. UNION (bestiJ, J.)
of recruits entering service from different sources to the quota for
each source, if the quota reserved for any source is not filled in for
a long time and the vacancies allotted to .the source arc carried
forward and the later day recruits from that source are given deemed
seniority over the earlier recruits from the other sources, it has
the pernicious tendency to give an undeserved advantage to a later
recruit over the earlier recruit and it would be violative of Arts .. 14
and 16. If it is held that Rule 25(1) (ii) has precedence oyer Rule
21, then Rule 25(1) (ii) is unconstitutional inasmuch as failure to
recruit enough number of perso.ns to the extent of the quota reserved for the source in a reasonable time, in the. absence of any power
to carry forward vacancies available to that source, the rota rule of
seniority would be discriminatory in character and lead to denial
of equality in the matter of appointment to public· service. It was
submitted in such a situation the rota rule would break down under
the weight of massive departure from the quota rule, and the seniority rule being inextricable inter-twined with the quota rule if given
effect to would be unjust, unfair and inequitous and would be violative of Art. I 4.
The Under Secretary in the Ministry. of External Affairs filed
an affidavit-in-opposition. Averment in Para II of the petition that
petitioners were working as permanent section officers in the integrated Grade II and III in the general cadre of the IFS '.B' was not
controverted. After referring to Rule 13 of the 1964 Rules, it was
stated that both the impugned seniority lists were. drawn. up in
accordance with the principles governing seniority in the grade as
per Rule 25. It was stated that where recruitmenMo a service or
cadre is from more than one source and each source is assigned a
quota of vacancies, in order to do justice to recruits from all sources,
the seniority is to be determined according to rota keeping in view
the available vacancies to each source. It was conceded that in
integtated grade II and III, the recruitment is done from three
~ifferent channels and quotas have been fixed for all these channels;
but the recruitment is not done at the same time.
While the departmental promotion is made after departmental promotion committee
makes recommendations, the recruitment through examination is
time-consuming because there is a .time gap between publication of
results and joining of candidates. It was further stated that it is not
practically possible to strictly adhere to the quota in any particular
year because candidates nominated by the Union Public Service
Commission may even decline to join service and additional candiA
• •
Cl '
n'
E
F
d
G
I
H
A
A
B
t.1
c.,
D ,,
E
F
'
G
'
H
. I
,
438
Surui.!E COURT Rili>oa±S
!·
<
l.
1 ,.
l198Sl 3 s.c.il.
dates can be taken from subsequent examinations only. It was
further submitted that the administration overcomes this difficulty
by adhering to the quota by rotation of vacancies ensuring that over
a period of time, the quota requirement is fully met.
The two
impugned seniority lists were sought to be sustained on the footing
that t,y and large quota was adhered to and a slight delay or variation in time schedule would not permit an inference that as the quota
rule was not adhered to, the rota rule of seniority cannot be given
effect. Replying. to the averments made in the petition that vacancies allotted to each source and not filled in at the relevant time
were being carried forward for years and that when the carried
forward.vacancies were filled, the recruits were giveu retrospective
deemed date for seniority relatable to the coming into existence of
the vacancy for that source without such a provision being found in .
the relevant rules, it was stated that vacancies have been carrieo
forward, if at all because of the non-availability of the candidates
and in the absence of a stipulation in the relevant rules permitting
diversion of vacancies from one quota to another, it was inevitable
that the quota of vacancies allotted to a source have to be carried
forward. Replying to the averments that in the impugned seniority
list blank spaces have been left open for giving seniority to persons
who have still not joined the service and are likely to join at some
uncertain date, it was submitted that this process would not push
down the seniority of the petitioners as they would occupy the same
· serial No. in the senioriiy list.
'
When the matter was being heard in the Court, one Radhey ·
Shyam Aggarwal, respondent No. 26 in the petition appeared and
filed his affidavit.
He was recruited to Grade IV IFS 'B' in 1964
through the open competitive examination held by Union Public
Service Commission. He was promoted to integrated Grade II and
III on the result of the limited departmental competitive examination
held by the Union Public Service Commission in 1977. He stated
that all Assistants in the Grade IV who have put in the required
number of years of service are eligible for participating in limited
departmental examination and that as the equality in this behalf is
guaranteed to all those similarly situated, such holding of examination arid promotion based on the result of the examination would
not violate Art. 14. Referring to Rule J3, he stated that the recruitment to the integrated Grade II and III is from three independent
sources with quota of vacancies assigned to each, the quota should
be more or less adhered to so as not to give any unintended benefit
•
)
•
•
•
G. s. LAMBA v, UNION (Desai, J.)
439
to individuals entering through. the source of recruitment over
others. It was stated that accepting the contention of the petitioner
would tantamount to giving unintended benefit to the promotees
promoted in excess of the quota temporarily. It was further stated
that delay in holding of the examination cannot work to the disad-
;vantage of those who have taken the. examination and qualified for
promotion and therefore they · should be accommodated in the
vacancies which have come into existence and were available for the
quota from the date the vacancies. came into existence notwithstanding the fact that the examination was held at a later date and
the results were published still later and appointment was made
thereafter. In short, he submitted that the two seniority lists were
valid and in consonance with the statutory rules.
Before we proceed to examine the contention of the petitioners·
on merits, it is necessary to refer to the rules of recruitment and
seniority relevant to Integrated Grade II and III. Rule . 13 which
provides for recruitment to posts in the Integrated Grade II and III
of the general cadre reads as under :
"13. Recruitment to posts in the Integrated Grades II. and
III of the General Cadre :
1.
(a) One sixth of the substantive vacancies, in the Integrated Grades II and III of the General Cadre
shall he filled by direct recruitment on the results
. of competitive examinations held by the Commission for this purpose from time to time. The
remaining vacancies shall be filled by the substantive appointment of persons included in the Select
List for the Integrated Grades II and III of the
General Cadre. Such appointments shall be made
in order of seniority in the Select List except when,
for r.easons to be recorded in.writing, a person is
not considered fit for such appointment in bis
turn.
(b) Temporary vacancies in the Integrated Grades II
and III of the General Cadre shall be filled by the
appointment of persons included in the Select List
for the Integrated Grades II and III of the General
Cadre. Any vacancies remaining unfilled thereafter shall be lil!e\I first from among the persons
,,
A
B
c
D
E
F
,,
G
H
A
'
B
~ .. :
c
D
'
E
p
G
lJ
440
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1985) 3 S.C.R.
approved for inclusion in the Select List and thereafter by the temporary promotion on the basis of
seniority subject to (he rejection of the unfit of
permanent officers of Grade IV the General Cadre
and Grade II of the Cypher Sub·Cadre who have
rendered not less than eight years of approved
service in any one grade or the two Grades and
are within the range of seniority. Such promotions shall be terminated when persons included
in the Select List for the Integrated Grades II and
II I of the General Cadre become available to fill
vacancies.
(2) The Select List referred to in clauses (a) and (b) of subrule {I) shall be prepared in the following manner:
(i) 33-1/3 per cent of the quota for inclusion in the
Select List shall consist of persons to be promoted
on the basis of a limited competitive examination
to be held by the Commission for this purpose
from time to time ; and
(ii) the rest of the promotion quota for inclusion in
the Select List shall consist of persons to be promoted on the basis of seniority subject to the
rejection of the unfit of the officers of the Grade
IV of the General Cadre and Grade II of the
Cypher Sub-Cadre who have rendered not less than
eight years of approved service in any one Grade
or both the Grades.
Provided that if any person appointed to such a
Grade is considered for promotion to the Integrated
Grades Ir and III of the General Cadre in accordance
with the provisions of this sub-rule, all persons senior
to him in that Grade shall also be· considered notwithstanding that they may not have rendered eight years
of approved service in that Grade or Grades, as the
case may be.
(3) The Controlling authority shall, from time to time lay ·
\)own t)le ratio i11 w)lich the available vacancies in the
•
•
•
G. s. LAMBA v. UNION (Desai, J.)
44t
Integrated Grades II· and Jll of the General Cadre shall
.be filled from Grade ~V of the General Cadre and
Cypher Assistants of the Cypher Sub-Cadre. This ratio
shall be fixed, as far as possible, on 'the basis of the
relative strength of the respective cadre posts.
Illustration : If the strength of Grade. IV of the General
Cadre is 720 and that of the Cypher
Assistants of the Cypher Sub·cadre 120,
the ratio for .promotion shall be 6 : !."
·~ Chapter III contains provisions for fixation of seniority in different
A
B
-v
grades. Rule 21 lays down a general provision for fixing of
C
•
•
seniority. Sub-rule 4 is relevant, which reads as under :
. • 1
·'"21. (4) Subject to the other provisions of this rule, persons
promoted or recruited earlier on the basis of earlier
selection or recruitment shall tie senior to those prom°'
ted or recruited on the basis of subsequent selection or
recruitment.''
Rule 22, 23 anci 24 provide for seniority inter-se of direct recruits,
seniority inter-se of officers promoted on the results of limited
competitive examination and seniority inter-se of officers promoted
to a grade on ·the recommendations of a departmental promotioμ
committee respectively but .amongst
themselves. Then
comes
Rule 25 which provides for seniority inter·se of the officers appoin;
ted to !1 grade from different sources. It reads as under : ·
· "25. Seniority lnter-se·or the officers appointed to a Grade
from different sources.
"
(!) Integr~ted Grade II & III of the General Cadre ..
(i) The eligible persons in Grade IV of the General
Cadre and Cypher Assistants of th.e Cypher SubCadre shall be arranged in separate lists in the
order on their relative seniority in their, respective
Grades. Thereafter the Departmental Promotion
Committee shall select persons for promotion from
each list upto the prescribed quota as. indicated in
rule 13 and arrange all the persons selected from
D
E
th.e twp )ists in a COl)So)i(lated order of merit which
H
0
H
442
.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
!19851 3 s.c.R.
'
.
will determine the seniority of.persons on promotion to Integrated Grades II and III of the General
Grade.
(ii) · Direct recruits to a Grade and persons substantively appointed to the Grade from the Select
List for the Grade shall be assigned seniority interse according to the quotas of substantive vacancies
in the Grade reserved for direct recruitment and
the appointment of persons included in the Select
List, respectively."
i 964 Rule have been enacted in exercise of power conferred by the
proviso to Art. 30~ of the Constitution and are thus indisputably
statutory in character. Recruitment to Integrated Grade II and III
of the general cadre is from two independent sources namely (i)
direct recruitment on the result of a competitive examination held
by the Union Public Service. Commission for this purpose from time
to time and (ii) by. the substantive appointment of persons included
in the Select List for Integrated Grade II and III of the General
Cadre. The Select List for the purpose of filling vacancies by subl'tantive appointment has to be prepared from persons coming from
tw~ independent sources as required by Rule 13(2) namely persons
to ·be promoted on the basis of a limited competitive examination to
be held by the Commission for this purpose and promotion from
Grade IV for inclusion in.the Select List on the basis of seniority in
Oradd IV of the General Cadre and Grade II of Cypher sub-cadre,
who have rendered not less thari 8 years of approved service in any
grade or both the grades. In short, recruitment to Integrated Grade
•
..
'".
•
•
II and'iii will be from three sources: (il I/6th of the substantive,-..(
vacancies to be filled in by direct recruitment on the result of a
\ -
competitive examination to be held by the Union Public Service
Commission, (ii) 33l% of the remaining 5/6th of the vacancies had
to be filled in by bringing them on the Select List on the ·basis of the
res,;lts. ,·of a limited competitive examination and the remaining
vacancies to be filled in by promotion on the basis of seniority from
Grade IV of General cadre or Grade II of Cypher cadre who have
rendeied not Jess than 8 years of approved service. There is thus
recruitment to Integrated Grade II and III from three independent
sources and a quota is fixed for recruitment from each source. The
quota as hereinabove set out was introduced by amending Rule 13 as
per notification dated February 12 197 5.
Earlier the quota for.
\lire~t recruits w~s ~5'.Yp of the yac~ncies for a period of 5 years anq
'
.-k"·
•
•
•
•
G. s. LAMBA v. UNION (Desai, J.)
443
then 33!% of the vacancies.
The quota for the other two sources
was 25% <if the remaining vacancies on the result of limited
competitive examination and the balance to be filled in by promotion according to seniority in the feeder grade. Thus the quota
for direct recruits was raised from 25% to 33!% and reduced to
I/6th cf the vacancies i.e.
162.3%.
The impugned seniority
lists have been drawn up rotating vacancies for each source
and if no recruitment is made from that source in a given year, the
place in the list available to the source as per rotation is kept open
and a later recruit at any distance of time from that source will be
assigned that place over persons who are already recruited from
other sources and would be working in substantive vacancies. ·The
net effect of a drawn-up seniority list in this manner is that a promotee in a given year even within its quota may go down to a much
later direct recruit as the place in rotation is kept open for him without limitation of time. This is the crux of the matter .
B
c
A bird's eye-view of the relative position of the petitioners
D
who are all departmental promotees in the two impugned seniority
lists would bring into focus the contours of controversy .
S.No. of the
petitioners
Name of the
petitioner
Place in the
1979 seniority list
Place in the
!983 seniority list
-------------------------·------
I
2
3
4
-------------------------------
I.
G.S. Lamba
397
163
2~
S.K. Chibber
380
147
3 .•
Ku! Bhushan
375
144
·4.
LS. Ailawadi
398
164
5.
K.D. Avdhani
379
146
6.
Q.L. Khanijow
387
153
7.
Ranvir Chawla
244
8.
N.D. Kharbanda
422
181
9.
V.N. Sharma
483
222
JO.
M. Jayaramai:
463
208
---·-----------------.....,..--...,.,,...--.,,,...._,.....~------
E
G
H
A
·c
:D
E
F
·G
H
444
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
11985] 3 S.C.R.
? ··
ltwiJI· be presently pointed out that the petitioners whose
:placements are indicated here and who have entered the service
would be junior to those who enter later into service and would be
placed at the vacant places in the list which are for purpose of
clarity enumerated hereunder. It will show that those who are yet
to c·ome would become senior to those in service and have entered
,servic.e number of years ahead to them. And one is not sure at what
Jeogth of time the few entrants will enter service.
The inequity, if it can be so called may be demonstrably pointed
at t!iis stage with reference to the seniority list of J 979.
Placements
in this list at Sr. Nos. 294, 300, 305, 312, 318, 324, 330, 336, 342,
348, 354, 360, 366, 372, 378, 384, 390, 396, 402, 408, 414, 420, 426,
432, 438, 444, 456, 462, 468, 474, 480 and 486 have been kept open
or vacant and are to be filled in at a later date by assigning seniority
to direct recruits who would be recruited to the service for the first
time after June 25, 1979 relevant to which seniority list was drawn
up.
These later recruits at some unknown future date would score
a march by nearly a hundred steps over the one at No. 486 already
in.service by regular promotion. Similarly placements at Sr. Nos.
377; 381. 385, 389, 392, 395, 399, 403, 406, 410, 413, 417, 421, 424,
428. 431, 435, 439, 442, 446, 449, 453, 457, 460, 464, 467, 471, 475,
478;482, 485, and 489 have been kept vacant for recruits who would
be recruited to the grade on the result of a ljmited departmental
examination which would be held after June 25, 1979. In other
words, whose who would come into serviee after June 25, 1979 either
from tbe source of direct recruitment or from the source of limited
competitive examination would fill in the above vacant places in the
seniority list and thereby score a march over others who have not
only been in service on June 25, 1979 and have been substantively
promoted and have become members of the service and who have
been included in the seniority list for the service.
Turning now to the impugned seniority list of June 30, 1983
which for all practieal purposes supersedes the seniority list of June
25, 1979, placements at Sr. Nos. 170, 175, 179, 184, 189, 193, 197,
203, 209, 215, 221, 227, 233, 239 have been kept vacant and these
places .. would be filled in by direct recruits who would join at some
future date not specified, after Jμpe
~O,
198~,
The
c;Jisturbin~
•
•
•
.Jr·
..
...
G. s. LAMBA v. UNION (Desai, J.)
·' .
..
:
4AS
feature is that .. ~hen _direcJ recruitment will be ma_de .at some
future
dat~· -after June 30
1983, the. first vacant place. at
Sr. No. 170.would b'e assigned to the first in the list of d"irect
recruits: and even "though-he would enter the service for the first
time somewere after June 30, 1983, he would be senior to the
d_epartmental promote~ hglding l! s.11bs,tll,ntive post at Sc. No. 171
Sh. D. R. Goel from February 2, 1978 and he would also be se_nior
to a recruit from the source of limited competitive examination
recruited on- November 13, 1979 and placed in the seniority list at
Sr. No. 172, one Shri Gurcharan S. Singh .. It would be advantageous
to recall here that the.eligibility criterion for appearing at a competi·
tive examiriii'tion to be held by Union Public Servfoe Commission for
direct recruitment as per Rule 20 of 1964 Rules would be in acco'r·
dance with the regulations made from time to .ti_me by the Govern·
ment in consultation with the Union Public Service Commission
wherever such consultation is· necessary.
The regulations were
not referred to in the course ·of hearing of these petitions.
But if the criterion was to be. a graduate's degree than any-one
appearing at a competitive examination after June, 1983 soon
after graduation may not h·ave passed HSC examination in 1976
or 1978 and yet the departmental promotees of that year would be
junior to such a schoolian. This is the net out-come of seniority
rule being based on rotation of vacancies available to each sour9c
and quota not being filled in from time to time when the vacancies
occur. The unfortunate outcome is t_he same as was noticed by this
Court in A. Janardhana v. Union of India & Ors.(1)
However, while
keeping a~ide this unjust and i~equiutous outcome and uninfluenced
~ by it, we may first look at the relevant rules for determining inter-sc
seniority of persons recruited from three independent sources.
The service was constituted in
195~. However the
stat~tory
rules came into force on May 5, 1964.
The· constitution ofthe
service by it.memorandum of the Govt. of India in 1956 was, in
exercise of the executive powers of the Government of India. The
statiifoiy rules· came into. force from May 6, 1964 and since then the
service is governed b)' the 1964 Rules. Commencing from the advent
of 1-964 Rules, the recruitment from three sources as actually mad~
may be noticed,
Information in this chart is according to averments
iri Para 16 bf the petition :
(I)
[19S3) 2 SCR 936:
A
B
c;:
E
11
G
446
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
1
11985) 3 S.C.R.
A
-----------------------------
Year
Departmental
Direct
Limited Dep~rtmental
Promo tees
recruits
examination appointees
n
----~------------------------
1964
7
~.
1965
6
JO
1966
1907
fc
1968
3
'../
1969
8
1970
1971
D
1972
34
25
..
1973
29
10
1974
5
14
1975
39
II
2
•
1976
26
5
16
E
1977
II
4
1978
47
7
2
1979
36
6
2
1980
27
3
5
F
1981
24
6
~
1982
24
2
•
1983
24
2
.---------------------
360
G
63
91
----------------------
With reference to Para 16 and the chart in the petition, in the
return filed on behalf of the first respondent Government of India it
is stated that the chart does not give true and correct picture and
H
was denied. It is stated that the exact figures are given in the chart
anneited as Annexure 'A' t<;> t]]e r~t\IP1· It reads as 11nder ;
•
b. §. i.AMilA v. tlNION (DeJal, i.)
447
ANNEXURE'A'
A
"Para 16 : The figures of recruitment. through the different
channel given by the petitioners ·are incorrect and
misleading.
Jr
The correct figures .are as given below :-
B
Year
DPs
LDE
DRs
Remarks
1964
15
11
--'\
1965 §
1966 §
.•
c
y
1967 §
40
9
1968 §
1969 §
1970
D
1971.
33
19
1972
7
1973
35
18
12(18•) •Indent. Candid ates joined
in 1975.
E
'
1974
-
5
5(6•) *Indent. Joined
in 1976.
1975
35
IS
8
Joined in
1977
-7'
1976
30
s
7•
*Indent
F
1977
s
5*
•Indent
•
•
1978
55
19
4•
*Indent:
1979
36
18
14*
. *Indent
1980
44
15
4•
*Indent
G
•. J:
1981
24
12
1•
*Indent
1982
24
12
8*
*Indent."
-----
-J<.
As far as the figures of direct recruits given fot the years I 97.3
~
to 1982, the column recites that the figures therein meritioned are of
A
8
c
D
E
F
•
H
I
t1§ss1 3 s.c.k.
the indent sent h¥ the Union Public Service Commission for making
direct recruitment bJt there· is nothing to show how many joined
as direct recruits. Accepting the information as supplied by the
respondent Union of India, what strikes one at a glance is that the
recruitment from three sources was never according to quota nor
according to available vacancies for each source. Record as discloseJ
does not indicate that the vacancies available to a particular source
but not filled in during the relevant period were carried forward.
No attempt was made to undertake direct recruitment in the years
1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1972, 1974 and 1977.