http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5  

PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA & ANR.DR. P.P.C. RAVANI & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: DR. AKHILESH CHANDRA AGRAWALDR. AKHILESH CHANDRA AGRAWAL & O

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       27/02/1998

BENCH: K. VENKATASWAMI, A.P. MISRA

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                             WITH                CIVIL APPEAL NO. 14573 OF 1996                       J U D G M E N T K. VENKATASWAMI, J.      These two   appeals  by special  leave arise out of one order of  the Central;  Administrative  Tribunal,  Allahabad Bench, dated 23.196 made in O.A. No. 1744 of 1993.      Civil Appeal  No. 1477/96 was preferred by the Union of India and  Civil  Appeal  No.  14573/96  was  filed  by  the aggrieved individuals  against one  and same  order  of  the Central Administrative Tribunal.      Shortly put  the facts leading to the filing of O.A.No. 1744/93 before the Tribunal are the following :-      The first  appellant and  the  members  of  the  second appellant were  all originally appointed as ad hoc Group ‘B’ Doctors  under  the  Central  Health  Services  Rules,  1963 between the  years 1968  to 1977.  After the  first year  of service those  doctors continued  in service in consultation with the  Union Public  Service Rules,  1982 came into force and under  those Rules  the posts were classified as Medical Officers,  Senior   Medical  Officers   and  Chief   Medical Officers. All  these Medical Officers were brought under one Group, Namely,  Group ‘A’.  Group ‘B’ was totally abolished. In spite  of the  appellants making repeated representations for regularities,  which made  them to  move the  Delhi High Court in W.P. No. 1144/83 for regularisation. The Delhi High Court dismissed  the  Writ  Petition.  However,  this  Court granted leave  and t  he appeal was numbered as Civil Appeal No. 3519/84.  At the  instance of Union of India, this Court by an  order dated 14.7.86 gave liberty to the Government of India to  request the  Union Public  Service  Commission  to conduct a  special selection  under Rule  8(2) of  the  1982 Rules for  selection/regularisation of  the appellants  only from their  original dates  of  appointments.  Some  of  the appellants, who  were appointed  by the Union Public Service Commission on  a regular basis as fresh entrants, moved this Court in  Writ Petition  No. 1228/86  seeking direction from this Court  that their  services rendered on ad hoc basis to be counted  . This  Court on 9.4.87 disposed of Civil Appeal No.3519/94 and Writ Petition No. 1228/86 holding that orders

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5  

for regularisation  of appointments  be issued  and that  it will take effect from the respective dated of their original appointments. A  Review Petition filed by the Union of India was dismissed  by this  Court on  15.9.87. In  spite of this Court’s order, the Union of India did not give effect to the orders of this court, which made the appellants to move this Court in  Contempt Petition in CMP No. 8076/88. The Contempt Petition  was  ultimately  disposed  of  by  this  Court  on 29.10.81 issuing  certain directions,  which read as follows :-      "1. Each  of the appellants will be      treated as regularised in Group ‘A’      of the  Central Health Service From      1.1.1973 or  the date  of his first      initial appointment  in the service      (though  as   ad  hoc   Group   ‘B’      doctor), whichever is later.      2. In order to ensure that there is      no disturbance of the seniority and      the   Promotional   prospects   the      regularly recruited  doctors, there      will be  separate seniority list in      respect of the appellants and their      promotions (about  which directions      are given below) shall be regulated      by such separate seniority list and      such    promotions     will    only      supernumerary posts  to be  created      as mentioned.      3.(a) Each  of the  appellants will      be eligible  for promotion  to  the      post of  Senior Medical  Officer or      Chief Medical  Officer  or  further      promotional posts  therefrom taking      into account  his seniority  in the      separate seniority list which is to      be drawn up as indicated above.      (b) The   promotion  of any  of the      appellants to  the post  of  senior      Medical  Officer,   Chief   Medical      Officer  and   further  promotional      post therefrom  will be on par with      the  promotion   of  the  regularly      recruited doctor who is immediately      junior to  the concerned  appellant      on the  basis of  their  respective      dated  of   appointment.  In  other      words,  if  a  regularly  recruited      doctor,  on   the  basis   of   the      seniority list  maintained  by  the      Department,  gets  a  promotion  as      Senior  Medical  Officer  or  Chief      Medical    Officer    or    further      promotion  thereafter,   then   the      appellant who was appellant who was      appointed  immediately  earlier  to      him will  also  be  promoted  as  a      Senior  Medical  Officer  or  Chief      Medical    Officer    or    further      promotion therefrom  (as  the  case      may be)  with effect  from the same      date.      4. In  order that  there may  be no      conflict or  any  possibilities  of      reversion,  the   post   of   which

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5  

    appellant will be promoted (whether      as Senior  Medical Officer or Chief      Medical  Officer   or  on   further      promotion therefrom) should only be      to  a   supernumerary  post.   Such      number   of   supernumerary   posts      should be created by the Government      as may b e necessary to give effect      to   the   above   directions.   No      promotion will  be given  to any of      the  appellants   in  the  existing      vacancies which will go only to the      regularly appointed doctors.      5. The  appellants hereby  agree to      give  up  all  monetary  claims  on      account  of   revision  of  scales,      regularisation  or   promotion   to      which they  would be  entitled till      31.10.1991.      6. Apart  from the appellants there      are certain doctors who fall in the      same category but who had not filed      writ  petitions   before  the  High      Court.  They  have  filed  directly      writ petitions  before  this  Court      bearing  Nos.   2620-2659/1985  and      intervention   applications.    The      intervention     applications   are      allowed and  rule nisi is issued in      the writ  petitioners  have  to  be      granted  the  same  relief  as  the      appellants. It  is made  clear that      all    these     applicants     and      petitioners will be entitled to the      same relief  as  the appellants for      all  purposes   of  seniority   and      promotion. All  monetary claims  on      account  of   revision  of  scales,      regularisation  or  promotion  till      31.10.1991 are  given up  by  these      applicants   and   petitioners   as      well."      On the  basis of  the order of this Court, the Union of India issued  orders on 11.12.91 stating that Senior Medical Officer will   be  promoted  as  Chief  Medical  Officer  on completion of six years of regular service as Senior Medical Officer or  on completion  of ten  years of combined regular service as  Medical Officers  and Senior Medical Officers of which at least two years would be as Senior Medical Officers on the  Basis  of  seniority-cum-fitness  subject  to  their securing Bench Mar of "good". On 18.12.92 the Union of India issued a  further order  stating that  since the Officers on promotion  were   adjusted   against   combined   sanctioned strength, no  supernumerary post  was  necessary.  In  these circumstances, it  appears that  the Deputy  Director, CGHS, Kanpur, sought  a clarification from the Director General of Health Services  on 27.8.83.  In reply  to that,  the letter impugned before the Tribunal came to be issued.      The  Tribunal   accepting  the   contentions   of   the respondents herein  (directly recruited  doctors) held  that the impugned letter was in violation of the directions given by this  Court and,  therefore, the same was illegal and not sustainable in  law. The  Tribunal was  of the view that the fact that the regularised doctors were to be accommodated in the supernumerary  posts to  be created, will show that they

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5  

will not  carry with  them the  administrative  powers.  The Tribunal observed as follows :-      "The  result,  therefore,  is  that      when  a   regular  post   of  Chief      Medical Officer  falls  vacant,  it      shall go  to the directly recruited      medical  officer.  Naturally,  such      post of Chief Medical Officers will      carry the  administrative powers as      well. Since,  no prejudice is to be      caused to  the regularised  medical      officer,  he  shall  be  posted  as      Chief Medical  Officer but  only on      super-numerary   post.    In    our      opinion, such  super-numerary  post      which is different than the regular      post, will  not carry  with it  the      administrative powers."      This view of the Tribunal, according to the appellants, in C.A.No.  14573.96 is prejudicial to their interest and by reason of the order of Tribunal they are to take orders from their juniors,  which was  not the  spirit or  intent of the order of  this court.  According to them the letter impugned before  the  Tribunal  was  quite  in  accordance  with  the directions given  by this Court and  the constriction put on that letter by the Tribunal was wrong.      From the narration of the facts, it is evident that the appellants, who are to be considered as regularised doctors, have consistently succeeded before this Court at every stage in establishing  their seniority.  As  noticed  above,  this Court while  giving directions  in  unmistakable  terms  has stated  that   the  regularised   doctors  will  take  their seniority on  and from  1.1.73 or  the date  of their  first initial appointment  in the  service (though as ad hoc Group ‘B’ doctors),  whichever is later. In view of this direction read with   direction  2 and 3 (supra), which was arrived at after a prolonged discussion, the view taken by the Tribunal that the  impugned letter dated 17.10.93 was in violation of the directions  given by this Court is totally uncalled for. Likewise,  the   view  taken  by  the  Tribunal  that  those appointed  in  the  supernumerary  posts  cannot  claim  the administrative powers  as that  will go  only  with  regular posts is  also wrong.  The  Tribunal  treated  supernumerary posts as  different one from the regular posts. This view of the Tribunal  cannot be  sustained in  view of a decision of this Court  in D.K.Reddy & Anr. This Court while considering a similar  question repelled an argument similar to the view taken by the Tribunal by observing as follows :-      "As a  result of  such an exercise,      if need arose appellant  no.      1      could  be   treated  to  have  been      holding   supernumerary   post   in      Junior Time  Scale Grade  of  Group      ‘A’  posts   and   in   all   other      promotional cadres.  He  cannot  be      treated   to    be   outside    the      sanctioned  strength  of  Posts  in      Junior Time  Scale grade  of  Group      ‘A’   or other promotional posts as      contended by  learned  counsel  for      respondents.  Otherwise,  the  very      creation  of   supernumerary  posts      would     become     otiose     and      meaningless."      The two  reasons given  by the  Tribunal  to  hold  the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5  

impugned letter  ass  not  sustainable  in  law,  cannot  be accepted as correct one. It is not in dispute that there was no quarrel between the two groups regarding the seniority or promotion. Both  sides agreed  that so  far as promotion and seniority are  concerned, they  are given in accordance with the  directions  of  this  Court,  but  only  regarding  the administrative    responsibilities/powers    the    directly recruited doctors  calimed that  they alone  should be given such administrative  powers irrespective  of  the  seniority which was  accepted by  the Tribunal  was right in conceding the claim of the directly recruited doctors on this aspect.      In the   result, the order of the Tribunal is set aside and the  letter impugned before the Tribunal does not suffer from any  illegality. The  appeal are allowed. There will be not order as to costs.