Seniority – LawUmbrella

The case of Taj Mohammad vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh, adjudicated by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, marks a significant moment in the interpretation of service rules within the State. The case intricately examines the implications of counting contractual service for seniority and other benefits in government employment, a topic of immense relevance to thousands of public sector employees. The case confirms the vital rights of public sector employees transitioning from contractual to regular appointments. The Court’s decision maintained that the entire service period, including the contractual stage, should count towards seniority and related benefits. The judgment aligns with the principles of fairness and equality set by the Indian Constitution and emphasizes that regularization of employment should retrospectively recognize the entirety of an employee’s service. This case is of substantial significance for its implications on seniority and regularization of contractual employees, in government departments.

Continue reading →

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indra Sawhney & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors, reported in 1992 Supp.(3) SCC 217, held that Article 16(4) of the Constitution does not permit reservations in the matter of promotion. Thereafter, the Constitution (Seventy-Seventh) Act, 1995 came into force on 17.6.1995. Later on, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Virpal Singh Chauhan & Ors., reported in (1995) 6 SCC 684, Ajit Singh Januja & Ors. (Ajit Singh-I) Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., reported in (1996) 2 SCC 715 and Ajit Singh (II) & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & ors., reported in (1999) 7 SCC 209, introduced the catch-up rule and held that if the senior general candidate is promoted then he will regain his seniority on promotion post above junior reserved promotes. It was also held that consequential seniority on promotion post is not covered by Article 16(4A).

Continue reading →