It is held by the Supreme Court that in the absence of any provision for consequential seniority in the rules, the ‘catch up rule’ would be applicable and the roster-point reserved category promotees cannot count their seniority in the promoted category from the date of their promotion and the senior general candidates if later reached the promotional level, general candidates would regain their seniority. By reversing the decision of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court, Supreme Court held that the Division Bench appeared to have proceeded on an erroneous footing that Article 16 (4A) of the Constitution of India automatically gives the consequential seniority in addition to accelerated promotion to the roster-point promotees and hence the judgment of the Division Bench could not be sustained.
As a result, the judgment of the Madras High Court was set aside by the SC and the appeals were allowed. State Government-respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were directed to revise the seniority list of Assistant Divisional Engineers applying the ‘catch up rule’ within four months. It was ordered that pursuant to the judgment ofthe Division Bench of Madras High Court, if any further promotion had been granted to the Assistant Divisional Engineers promoted from the rank of Junior Engineers following rule of reservation with consequential seniority, the same should be reversed. Further promotion of Assistant Divisional Engineers should be as per the revised seniority list.
(Reference: CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6631-6632 of 2015 GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU
AND ANR. ETC.ETC. V/s. V. VIVEKANANDAN & ORS. ETC.decided on August 27, 2015)