http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: NITYANANDA KAR AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT09/11/1990

BENCH: PUNCHHI, M.M. BENCH: PUNCHHI, M.M. MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) RAMASWAMY, K.

CITATION:  1991 AIR 1134            1990 SCR  Supl. (2) 644  1991 SCC  Supl.  (2) 516 JT 1990 (4)   418  1990 SCALE  (2)976

ACT:     Orissa    Administrative   Service    Class    II/Orissa Subordinate Administrative Service Class III--Deputy Collec- tors  and Sub-Deputy Collectors--Integration  of--Assignment of  year of allotment--Whether valid--Orissa  Administrative Service  Class II (Appointment of Officers Validation)  Act, 1987--Validity of.

HEADNOTE:     On  the  recommendation of a High Power  Committee,  the Government of Orissa by its resolution dated 7.2.1972 decid- ed  to merge the two cadres of its services known as  Orissa Administrative  Service  Class  II  and  Orissa  Subordinate Administrative Service Class III. The officers in the former cadre  prior to 7.2.72 were designated as Deputy  Collection and those of the latter as Sub-Deputy Collectors. The  total integration  was to be completed in a phased manner and  the two cadres were to be abolished and a single cadre of Orissa Administrative  Service with a senior and junior branch  was to  be  constituted. Though initially this  integration  was contemplated  to be completed within a period of  10  years, later  on and from 21.12.1973, the two branches  were  abol- ished  and a new cadre of O.A.S. II was constituted  and  in terms  of  the  Government order, all members  of  the  then existing  O.A.S.  11 (J.B.) known as  Sub-Deputy  Collectors were  placed in the seniority list below the last person  in the  then existing O.A.S. II (S.D. known as  Deputy  Collec- tors. The inter se seniority of the ’mergerists’ and  direct recruits who had joined the cadre after passing the competi- tive examination conducted by the Public Service Commission, was  determined  keeping  in view the concept  of  ’year  of allotment  contemplated  under  the  Orissa   Administrative Service  Class  11 (Appointment by Promotion,  Transfer  and Selection)  Regulations,  1959. Some of the  mergerists  who were initially in the O.A.S. III and came on integration  to O.A.S.  Il  challenged  the method of fixing  the  ’year  of allotment’ before the Orissa High Court in Ananta Kumar Bose v.  State  of  Orissa, AIR 1986 Orissa  151.  The  challenge therein was confined only to the recruits of the years  1970 and  1971 and was abandoned with regard to the  recruits  of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

the  year 1972. The High Court in that case upheld the  sen- iority  of the direct recruits of the years 1970  and  1971. Special Leave Petition preferred 645 against  the  decision of the High Court in  that  case  was rejected  by this Court. Thereafter the appellants  who  en- tered  the  cadre of O.A.S. II on 21.12.1973  as  mergerists filed  another writ petition in the High  Court  challenging the  seniority of respondents 4 to 13 contending  that  even though  there was no invitation for filling up any  post  in the O.A.S. II in the advertisement issued by Public  Service Commission,  yet  respondents  4-13 were  given  service  on different dates in the year 1975 and further those  respond- ents  had  been assigned ’1972’ as the ’year  of  allotment’ without  authority  of law, they having  joined  service  on different  dates in 1975. The High Court rejected the  peti- tion holding that the case was entirely covered by the  Full Bench  decision  in  Ananta Kumar Bose’s  case  referred  to above. Hence this appeal before this Court.     The petitioners in the two Writ Petitions (Nos.  1044/87 and  929/ 87) challenge the vires of the Orissa  Administra- tive  Service Class II (Appointment of Officers  Validation) Act,  1986  and the petitioners in the third  writ  petition seek  quashing of Resolutions whereby the year of  allotment concept was introduced by the Government of Orissa.     It  is contended by the petitioners-mergerists  that  in the absence of clear cut rules relating to the determination of seniority, length of service should be the guiding  prin- ciple whereas direct recruits contend that the principle  of ’year  of  allotment’ has been the  traditional  and  tested modality  to regulate and govern seniority inter se  between the promotees, and the direct recruits.     Dismissing  the  appeal  and partly  allowing  the  writ petition  where challenge to the validity of the  Validation Act has been made, this Court,     HELD: The Orissa Legislature’s preserving the  principle of  the  year of allotment for the direct  recruits  of  the years 1970 and 1971 and not extending the same to the direct recruits  of the year 1972, to say the least  is,  arbitrary and liable to be struck down under Article 14 of the Consti- tution, for what is good and valid for 1970 and 1971, direct recruits  is equally good and valid for the direct  recruits of the year 1972. [654F-G]     Since  the two groups of recruits were similarly  placed and the situation did not yield to any reasonable  classifi- cation it was not open to the State Legislature to  maintain in artificial classification and provide by the impugned Act unequal treatment to the 1972 recruits. Thus Section 3(2)(a) of the Validation Act, in so far as it permits the deemed 646 promotees  of  the year 1972 to be placed above  the  direct recruits  of the year 1972 in the Gradation List, is  viola- tive of Article 14. [655B-C]     Direct Recruit Class H Engineering Officers’ Association v.  State of Maharashtra and Others, [1990] 2 SCC  715  fol- lowed.     Ananta  Kumar Bose v. State of Orissa, AIR  1986  Orissa 151 affirmed.

JUDGMENT: