AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
BY MALLIKA ARYA, AM:-
In this case relating to seniority the applicants have prayed for the following relief:-
“(8)8.1To summon the entire records.
8.2Quash and set aside the seniority status of Respondent No.4 and 5 as reflected in seniority list at Annexure A/1 over and above the applicants, but at bottom as per rule on the subject,
8.3To quash the promotion order dated 09/06/2020 (Annexure A/2) or else, applicants be promoted to HS Gde II from the date when their juniors were promoted with all consequential benefits including seniority over them, arrears of pay and allowances.
8.4Grant any other relief to the applicant as deemed fit and proper on facts and circumstances of the case.”
The facts of the case is that applicants No. 1 to 4 were appointed as Fitter/General (Semi Skilled) and applicant No.5 was appointed as Fitter/Boiler (Semi Skilled). Similarly the respondents Nos.4 to 7 were also selected during the same period in 2013 and were appointed as Fitter in different trades. Instead of giving promotion to higher grades in their respective Trades, Respondent No.3 merged the various categories of Fitter Trades (Skilled grades) as feeder category for further promotion. They published a combined seniority list for Fitter (Skilled Trades) in January 2019 (Annexure A/4). The impugned seniority list is based on length of appointment/date of joining in Skilled grade. In the said seniority list, the name of applicant No.1 is shown at serial No.87, applicant No.2 is placed at serial No.107, applicant No.3 is placed at serial No.77, applicant No.4 is placed at serial No.70 and applicant No.5 at serial No.96. At the same time Respondent No.4 is at Sl No. 122, Respondent No.5 is at Sl No.118, Respondent No.6 is at Sl No.78, Respondent No.7 is at Sl No.97. Subsequently, Respondent No.3 drew a combined seniority list for all trades in Fitter category (Skilled Grade) based on merit in the select list drawn for appointment in Semi-Skilled Trades (Annexure A-1). Those who were promoted earlier were not included in the revised seniority list based on merit. A complete reversal has taken place in the new seniority list and the established seniority has been altered without any prior notice to applicants. Not only has the seniority position been altered by Respondent No.3, but the juniors of applicants have got promoted to Highly Skilled Grade-II vide impugned order dated 09.06.2020 (Annexure A/2). The newly promotees are junior to the applicants both in old and the revised seniority list. The applicants No. 1, 2 and 5 had given representations to Respondent No.3 which are collectively annexed as Annexure A/6. Reply to some representations have been received from the office of respondent No.3. There is no consistency in the policy followed by authorities and they have taken contradictory stand in each case by not following a uniform principle.
The respondents have filed the reply wherein it has been submitted that seniority list of Fitter(Skilled) as on 01.01.2019 was circulated by the Respondent No.3 which was prepared on the basis of the date on which the Skilled Grade was granted to the employees as per OFB letter dated 24.12.2002 (Annexure R-1) & 13.01.2003 (Annexure R-2). The name of applicants from serial No. 1 to 5 are appearing in the seniority list at Serial No. 87, 107, 77, 79 & 96 respectively and the name of Respondents No. 4 to 7 are appearing at serial No. 122, 118, 78 & 97 respectively, which is annexed as Annexure R-3. It has been further submitted by respondents that all sub-trades in Fitter grade were merged due to the functional requirement. A common seniority list of Fitter (Skilled & Highly Skilled) was re-casted on 01.01.2020 and circulated by the respondent No. 3. The seniority list has been prepared as per merit of the selection panel. This exercise has been done by the respondents in compliance with SRO 185 dated 01.11.1994 (Annexure R-7).
The applicants have filed the rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents wherein they have re-iterated their earlier stand as taken in the O.A.
We have heard both the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and the documents on record.
The applicants are challenging the seniority placement of respondent4 & 5 as reflected in the impugned seniority list (Annexure A-1). Further they are challenging the promotion order 09.06.2020 (Annexure A-2). They are further seeking promotion to the Highly Skilled Grade II from the date when their juniors have been promoted with other consequential benefits. We take note of the fact that some of the applicants gave representations to the respondents vide Annexure A-6. In reply the respondents have communicated to the applicants that a combined seniority list of all grades has been formulated. Hence, HS-II, HS-I and MCM have been merged under the category of Fitter (all trade). After issuance of the combined seniority list, promotions have been effected. The combined seniority list has been re-casted for Fitter (Skilled) on 01.01.2020 and has been circulated by the factory. The entire exercise has been conducted on the basis of merit in light of the OFB guidelines issued vide letter dated 04.08.2015 read with DoPT guidelines of 04.11.1992 and O.M. dated 03.07.1986.
In the combined seniority list drawn on 01.01.2020, the names of the applicants 1 to 5 are figuring at serial no. 4, 13, 17, 19, & 38 and the name of Respondents No. 4 to 7 are figuring at serial no. 3, 49, 21 & 22. The respondents have attached a copy of the Skilled category seniority list as on 01.01.2020 and Highly Skilled category seniority list as on 01.01.2020 (Annexure R-4 & R-5). All employees were informed vide letter dated 01.01.2020 (Annexure R-6) that if they are not satisfied with the seniority lists they can raise the objection alongwith documents before 15.01.2020. From the documents on record it is evident that the applicants did not raise any objection to the impugned seniority list in the skilled category within the prescribed time line. They have subsequently made representations on 12.10.2020 that is much after the time limit for raising objections got over. Further, the action of the respondents in recasting the seniority list on the basis of merit of the selection panel and merging all trades vide seniority list dated 01.01.2020 on the grounds of functional requirement cannot be faulted with. The re-casted seniority list has been issued as per the directions of Ordnance Factory Board contained in circular dated 04.08.2015 read with DoPT circular dated 04.11.1992.
We also take note of the respondents contention that no parity can be drawn to the order passed in the case of Madan Sutradhar vs. UOI & Ors. in O.A. 886/2019, wherein the CAT vide order dated 09.10.2019 had observed that the claim of the applicant being genuine and had given an observation to decide the case of the applicant within a period of 60 days. Thereafter the respondents had forwarded a proposal to modify the existing seniority list of the Carpenter trade.
In light of the discussions and the detailed reply given by the respondents we are of the considered view that the applicants should have raised their grievance if any against the impugned seniority list at the relevant time which was not done by them.
Reliance is placed in the case of B.S.Bajwa and Another vs. State of Punjab and others, AIR 1999, SC 1510, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has stated as under:-
“It is well settled that in service matters the question of seniority should not be re- opened in such situations after the lapse of a reasonable period because that results in disturbing the settled position which is not justifiable. There was inordinate delay in the present case for making such a grievance. This alone was sufficient to decline interference under Article 226 and to reject the writ petition.”
In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court and discussions made hereinabove, we do not find any ground to interfere with the orders passed by the respondents.
Accordingly, the O.A. stands dismissed. No costs.
As a sequel thereof, pending Miscellaneous Application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of.