Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. vs Chander Pal
- SCC1987 Supp (1) SCC 41
- AIRAIR 1987 SC 1334
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an employee's service has been terminated and subsequently reinstated on compassionate grounds with an explicit condition that the break in service shall not be counted as duty, a later governmental declaration of quasi-permanent status with condonation of the break does not operate to create continuity of service backdated to the original completion of probation; rather, confirmation shall be dated from the date of the governmental declaration of quasi-permanent status, and seniority shall be refixed accordingly from that date.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
2. We find no infirmity in the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal except for an error in directing that the date of confirmation of the respondent should be January 1, 1970 i.e. the date on which he completed his period of probation as a Constable in the Central Bureau of Investigation. The Tribunal was justified in quashing the impugned order dated February 14, 1983 directing his confirmation which arbitrarily fixed his date of confirmation as November 6, 1979 without any rational basis. The Tribunal proceeded on an erroneous basis in adopting January 1, 1970 to be the date upon the wrongful impression that the effect of reinstatement of the respondent on September 21, 1972 was to bring about continuity of service. Although the respondent had completed his period of probation on January 1, 1970, his service came to be terminated on November 23, 1971. On his representation, the Government directed his reinstatement on compassionate grounds on condition that the period between the date of termination and the date of reinstatement would not be treated as duty for any purpose. Subsequently, on further representation by the respondent the Government by order dated September 5, 1974 condoned the break in his service for the purpose of declaring him quasi-permanent w.e.f. January 1, 1971. In modification of the direction made by the Tribunal we direct that the respondent is entitled to be confirmed w.e.f. January 1, 1971, the date on which the Central Government made a declaration of his being a quasi-permanent employee, and his seniority be refixed accordingly, and he would also be entitled to all consequential benefits. This however shall not act to the prejudice of persons junior to the respondent who may have already been promoted to higher posts.
3. Subject to this modification, the appeal fails and is dismissed. We hope and trust that the Central Government will implement the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal as expeditiously as possible and in any event, not later than four months from today. No costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free