Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, May 18: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that seniority cannot be claimed merely on the basis of some entries reflected in the service book.
This significant judgment has been passed in a petition seeking issuance of appropriate writs for fixation of petitioner’s seniority, proper placement in the final seniority list and consequential release of his retrospective promotional benefits.
The case set up by the petitioner was that he came to be appointed as Junior Clerk against a clear vacancy on 08.11.1974 and in pursuance thereof, he joined at Srinagar on 11.08.1974. Since his basic appointment did not make it clear whether his appointment was on regular or ad hoc basis, he made a representation to the Director General of Civil Aviation for clarification so that he could be regularized with effect from 08.11.1974—the date he joined at Aeronautical Communication Station (ACS), Srinagar.
Request of the petitioner was considered and vide order No. 12020/21/76-ES dated 09.07.1976 passed by DGCA, concerned officer made entry in his service book.
After hearing Youvraj Bhushan for the petitioner Bushan Lal Koul (now dead) whereas Advocate Inderjeet Gupta with Advocate Yatin Mahajan for the Airport Authority, Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed, “an ad hoc appointment is nothing but fortuitous and it does not confer benefit of seniority for the period the employee was on ad hoc employment and an employee appointed on ad hoc basis is not entitled, in law, to have his ad hoc service counted for the purpose of fixation of seniority”.
“Petitioner has failed to produce any order of regularization of his service from 08.11.1974 and as per the seniority list on record, the petitioner stands regularized with effect from 12.05.1980. Seniority cannot be claimed merely on the basis of some entries reflected in the service book. Petitioner is not only obliged to show that order of regularization, if any, was passed by an authority competent to make regular appointment to the service in compliance with the rules and regulations, but also to establish that he was entitled, in law, to have benefit of seniority for the period he was serving on ad hoc basis”, High Court said.
“Petitioner, in the present case, has failed on both the counts. Therefore, petitioner is not found entitled, in law, to have his ad hoc service counted for the purpose of fixation of his seniority”, High Court while dismissing the petition being devoid of any merit.
Justice Sekhri also expressed displeasure over the manner respondents, particularly, DGCA have dealt with the controversy. “Since there were allegations and counter allegations regarding manipulation of service record of the petitioner, respondents were obliged to initiate a detailed enquiry into the case in order to ascertain the truth or falsehood”, High Court said.
“Respondents could be directed to make an in-depth probe to fix the responsibility, however, since the controversy dates back to the year 1976, the present petition came to be filed in this court in 2003—20 years back and particularly since the petitioner has already passed away, it may not be proper to do so, at this length of time”, High Court said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel