Revision of seniority with retrospective effect by implementing apex court order

This query is : Resolved 
 

(Querist)
01 January 2017

Good Evening. Happy New Year. By virtue of of giving effect to the order of the Apex Court in the case of NR Parmar (2012), the seniority of the officials in the incometax department was reshuffled. While fixing the inter=se seniority between the Direct recruits and promotees, the DRs have been given preference and fixed the seniority from the date of requisition made by the Department to the recruiting agency. The decision is rendered in 2012 and it was not mentioned in the order that it is retrospective, but the seniority in some states got reshuffled w.e.f.1986. My querry is:
(a) The accrued rights of the officials have been taken back by reshuffling the seniority, adversely affecting the promotees. They have not been heard while rendering the judgement. Whether any writ before the SC/HC is possible now, on the ground that thousands of employees are effected and they have not been heard;
(b) Whether any petition before the CAT can be filed challenging the implementation of the Apex Court order by the Department?
(c) Whether a person can simultaneously file the petitions before CAT/SC? What is the time limit?
(d) who are the senior counsels to give opinion to group of employees on service matter at Delhi to appear before the SC.
Kindly suggest.
Thank you.




Guest (Expert)
02 January 2017

Dear Chandrasekhar,

Any SC judgment cannot be challenged before the lowest court, i.e., the CAT, etc. You can take up your individual case before the CAT, but in view of the SC judgment, your case can get dismissed very easily.

So, the departmental promotees can file either an appeal in the SC against the order or a PIL, there being injustice to a large number of departmental employees throughout India.

In fact, departmental employees mostly remain at disadvantageous position as the cases are generally represented by or on behalf of the direct recruits, who are always positioned on the top posts by virtue of their permanent appointment right from their induction in any department, while departmental employees are kept intentionally in adhoc officiating position for years together despite of availability of vacant permanent posts.


P. Venu (Expert)
02 January 2017

Any solution lies from the Apex Court itself. However, the facts posted are too sketchy to offer any constructive suggestion.

Rajendra K Goyal (Expert)
02 January 2017

Agree wit the expert P. Venu.

Kumar Doab (Expert)
02 January 2017

Agreed with expert Mr. P. Venu.

Chandrasekhar (Querist)
03 January 2017

Sir, thanks for valuable advice. To submit my query in a more elaborate manner, it is to state that there was a circular of DOPT rendered in 1959 governing the inter-se seniority between direct recruits an promotees. That was modified by DOPT in 1986. One person by name Mr.Parmar, a promotee filed a petition which finally reached the SC. The SC, while interpreting the DOPT circular of 1986 held that the direct recruits should be placed above the promotees meaning thereby that they get the seniority right from the date of their taking the examination or from the date of requisitioning the vacancy to the recruiting agency. The seniority of the promotees all over India has been adversely affected. The seniority was revised from 1986 in all cadres of the incometax department, though the judgement rendered in 2012 did not say anything about its retroactive effect. Is it not a violation of constitutional right? Taking back the accrued right of seniority and disturbing the settled seniority caused lot of agony to the promotees. If any writ is possible before the SC, how many petitioners are required? The review petition filed on NR Parmar judgement is dismissed by the Apex Court. The possible remedy is only Writ petition. Kindly suggest the correct counsel who can take up this service matter or can offer legal opinion. What are the chances of winning? Thank u. REgards.



Guest (Expert)
03 January 2017

Judgment on Parmar case and on revision case is required to be gone through for examination of pros & cons of the case and the reasons of judgment against the promotee officers.

About correct counsel, that you may have to search by yourself, after judging his performance in some other cases of seniority. Recommendation of counsel by some one may not help you much.





You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :









×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu

web analytics