IN WP (C) 14908 OF 2022 - DEL HC-As per DoPT guidelines, seniority of candidates selected through interviews was based on UPSC's recommendation letter; Candidates recommended later from reserve list had to be placed below those in main list vis-a-vis selection process to post of Assistant Director & Deputy Director, Operations posts: Delhi High Court
Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta [12.07.2023]

Read More :Union of India v Pallavi Gupta

Simran Singh

New Delhi, July 13, 2023: Setting aside an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, the Delhi High Court has directed the Union Government to re-fix the seniority list at the appropriate place by taking into account the marks obtained by the respondent in the selection process to the post of Assistant Director and Deputy Director, Operations posts, by issuing a revised Seniority List stating that the petitioners' seniority list was justified.

In the matter at hand, the Tribunal had directed fixing seniority based on marks obtained in the selection process as communicated by the Union Public Service Commission. However, the petitioners had contended that seniority was fixed according to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) guidelines based on the consolidated merit list provided by the UPSC as well as on the basis of the ‘reserve policy’, but there was no instructions to prepare the lists on the basis of marks obtained by the candidates.

The controversy was whether the candidates appointed from the Reserve List, because of non-joining of the candidates initially recommended by the UPSC, would rank senior to the candidates initially recommended/appointed in terms of the first recommendation of the UPSC, as they possessed higher marks and/or had joined the service prior to such initially recommended candidates. The Court responded to the question in negative in view of the instructions issued the DoP&T contained in the consolidated document on ‘Instructions and Guidelines on Seniority’.

The Bench stated that the DoP&T prescribed that inter-se seniority of the candidates nominated from Reserve List would be fixed as per the consolidated merit given by the UPSC. The said merit had no bearing insofar as the Main List of 13-04-2015 was concerned. In fact, the UPSC vide its letter dated 13-09-2019 had advised DGCA to prepare a consolidated Merit List using the following principle;

1. Candidates recommended from the Main List in order of Merit and
2. After that candidate from Reserve List in order of date of recommendation letter, in the order of merit within that.

The Bench stated that the Tribunal had erred in relying on such case laws that were by that time were either diluted or set aside by the High Court, hence the same should have have been considered by it while allowing the application. “We find no pleasure in stating that the Tribunal did not even bother to find out as to whether the judgment of its Ernakulam Bench stood upheld by a Higher Forum ”

The Court observed that as per DoPT guidelines, seniority of candidates selected through interviews was based on the date of UPSC's recommendation letter. Candidates recommended later from the reserve list had to be placed below those in the main list.“In view of the clear exposition of law, it must be stated that the impugned Seniority List issued by the petitioners is justified. We set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal dated March 24, 2022, in O.As.1776/2020 and 130/2020. The pending applications are dismissed as infructuous. No orders as to costs.”