T. Shantharam
Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors [1995] INSC 53 (16 January 1995)
Ramaswamy,
K. Ramaswamy, K. Sen, S.C. (J)
CITATION:
1995 AIR 1123 1995 SCC (2) 538 JT 1995 (2) 642 1995 SCALE (1)320
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
ORDER
1.
Leave granted.
2. The
facts are telling that the appellant was appointed in the Revenue Department as
Second Division Clerk in Manglore on October 8, 1963. He was sent on deputation to the
Food and Civil Supplies Department which was then part of Revenue-Department as
Assistant Civil Supplies Inspector on December 26, 1967 and was promoted as Second Grade
Civil Supplies Inspector on September 11, 1968 which is stated to be equivalent to Sheristedar. The 5th respondent Mr.
R.K.Vasudev was appointed as a Second Division Clerk on January 22, 1965 in
Food Wing of the Revenue Department- Thereafter he was regularised as Second
Division Clerk on September 30, 1971 and was promoted as a Sheristedar on June
17, 1982. From these facts, it is clear that at all levels of appointments and
promotions, the appellant was always senior to 5th respondent. But one fact
that remains on record is that the appellant continued to be on deputation in
the Food Wing of Revenue Department. When he was sought to be repatriated, the
appellant filed APplication No.6432/86 before the Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore.
The
Tribunal by its order dated January 28, 1988
directed absorption of the appellant in the Food Department as indicated in the
order which reads thus:
"Since
the applicant is working in the Food and Civil Supplies Department since
1966(about 32 years and he has not been given any proforma promotion in the
Revenue Department and there are no valid ground to reject his request for
absorption, we are of the considered opinion that the Applicant is entitled for
a direction to the respondents to absorb him in the Department of Food and
Civil Supplies in the post now held by him. It is ordered accordingly after
quashing Annexure A." Subsequent thereto it would appear that the
appellant was absorbed and he was placed above the 5th respondent and also
promoted on January 1,
1980 as a Assistant
Director. It would also appear from the record that the 5th respondent also
promoted as Asia Director. The only question is of inter se seniority between
the appellant and the 5th- respondent. Shri Rama Jois, learned senior counsel
for the respondent contended that the Rules prescribed that on the deputation
the post should be the post equivalent to which he was holding in the parent
department and the appellant cannot be transferred and deputed in the Food Wing
on higher post than the post hold in the parent department. Though there is
force in the contention as per the Rules but meat of the matter is that the
appellant uninterruptedly worked in the Food department till date of the order
by the Tribunal. Under these circumstances, though initially he might have
mistakenly been deputed to hold higher post in the Food & Civil Supplies
Department, since the appellant had obviously discharged his duties and higher
re- sponsibilities to the satisfaction of all concerned, at this distance of
time, it is highly unjust to send him back to hold the post in the present
department which he was entitled to hold and the Tribunal is not 644 right to
interfere with action of the department in its absorption of the appellant as
per its own earlier order.
The
direction given by the Tribunal at the instance of 5th respondent in the
impugned order dated July
10, 1994 is
accordingly set aside and the order issued in the earlier proceedings stands
confirmed. In consequence the order of absorption and the promotion given to
the appellant stand upheld. The appeal is allowed. No costs.
Back
