NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL  NO(S). 7407/2018

(ARISING FROM SLP(C) NO.10342/2015)

PANKAJ KR. MISHRA & ORS.                    APPELLANT(S)

                               VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                        RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

Leave granted.

2. I.A.  Nos.3/2015  and  95102/2018  are  allowed  in

terms of the prayer(s) made in the applications.

3. The crucial issue raised in this appeal pertains

to the promotion in 2151 posts in the cadre of Upper

Division Clerk (UDC) as on 2003.  It is the case of

the  respondents  that  on  account  of  cadre

restructuring  in  the  Central  Secretariat  Service

(CSS)  there  was  a  percolating  effect  of  2151

vacancies in the cadre of UDC arising in the Central

Secretariat Clerical Service, in 2003.  The said 2151

vacancies had to be filled up in the ratio of 75:25

by  the  seniority  quota  and  Limited  Departmental

Competitive  Examination  quota  respectively.   It  is

1

the case of the appellants that as a matter of fact

there was no such cadre restructuring in the Central

Secretariat  Clerical  Service.   According  to  them,

they have become qualified in the 25% quota meant for

Limited Departmental Competitive Examination category

from  the  year  2004  onwards  and,  therefore,  the

contesting respondents, who are otherwise juniors to

them in UDC cadre, cannot get an ante dated promotion

on  the  basis  of  a  hypothetical  calculation  of

vacancies available as on 2003.   

4. We  have  heard  Mr.  V.  Shekhar,  learned  senior

counsel appearing for the appellants, Ms. V. Mohana,

learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the  Union  of

India  and  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the

contesting respondents extensively.

5. Mr.  Shekhar,  learned  senior  counsel  for  the

appellants, also pointed out that in the process of

the ante dated promotion of Lower Division Clerks to

Upper Division Clerks and further as Assistants, some

of  the  Lower  Division  Clerks  were  promoted  to

Assistants  even  without  having  actually  served  as

Upper Division Clerks or without having the required

length  of  service  as  Upper  Division  Clerk.  It  is

submitted  that  as  per  the  settled  legal  position,

even for ad-hoc promotion, qualified  and eligible

2

candidates, if available, cannot be overlooked.  This

is seriously disputed by Ms. Mohana, learned senior

counsel appearing for the Union of India and learned

counsel appearing for the contesting respondents.

6. If,  as a  matter of  fact, any  person has  been

appointed  to  the  cadre  of  Assistant  without  the

required qualification/experience, as mandated under

the  Rules  at  the  relevant  time,  and  in  case  the

appellants have a case that they were available as

eligible, as per Rules,  for such promotion, it is a

matter to be examined.   

7. Therefore, we grant liberty to the appellants to

point  out  such  instances  of  promotions  granted

contrary to Rules, within a period of two months from

today.  The Competent Authority shall examine such

instances  and  take  appropriate  remedial  steps  to

ensure  that  the  promotions  are  done  only  as  per

Rules.   The  appellants  concerned  or  any  other

affected party shall also be given an opportunity of

hearing in the process.  The needful, as above, will

be done within a period of four months from the date

of receipt of the representation.

8. Subject to the above, the appeal is disposed of,

making it clear that we have not otherwise interfered

with the impugned judgment of the High Court.

3

9. Pending  applications,  if  any,  shall  stand

disposed of.

10. There shall be no orders as to costs.

...….................J.               [KURIAN JOSEPH]  

.......................J.               [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL]  

NEW DELHI; JULY 31, 2018.

4