ARUN PALLI, J. - (1.) STAFF Selection Commission (for short 'the Commission'), New Delhi, carried out the process of selection to the Posts of Inspectors in the Department of Central Excise, Chandigarh Zone, Chandigarh. The Commission, out of the total 125 posts, reserved 105 posts and made selections accordingly. As a result, 70 members were selected in the category of Backward Classes, 23 belonged to Scheduled Castes, 12 belonged to Scheduled Tribes and 22 members were selected in the un -reserved category. Petitioner also competed for selection in the general category but remained unsuccessful. The said selection was assailed by the petitioner and two others before the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal).
(2.) THE short ground on which the selection was sought to be quashed was that the reservation by the Commission which exceeded beyond 50% of the posts, was impermissible. It was asserted, that Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Indira Sawhney versus Union of India AIR 1993 SC 477, had settled that reservation quota cannot exceed 50% in any given year and the 50% rule applies to every unit of a year irrespective of the composition of the vacancies. Thus, there was an apparent violation or overstepping of the parameters laid down by the Constitution and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Tribunal, on a consideration of the matter, vide order dated 13.11.1996, allowed the applications and quashed the selection. However, it was made clear that the process of selection was not required to be re -carried out once again as appointments could be made from the existing select list applying the limit of 50% quota. Pursuant to the decision of the Principal Bench dated 13.11.1996, the Department carried out a fresh selection process. This, however, would be material to point out that the applicants who were selected pursuant to the original selection and had joined in the meanwhile, in the month of March 1996, were allowed to continue notwithstanding that their selection stood set aside. That as a result of the fresh selection, the petitioner along with some others, who were earlier selected, were selected in the fresh selection. Accordingly, the petitioner joined the Department on 25.09.1997.
(3.) UNDER the rules, the seniority of Inspectors, inter se, in the cadre was required to be fixed on the basis of their merit position or in terms of the recommendations made by the Commission. The petitioner having discovered that he was being shown junior to certain other members of service, who were his batchmates and, though joined in the month of March 1996 but were lower in merit than the petitioner. The petitioner made a representation that was acceded to by the respondents and the petitioner was afforded due position in the seniority list, circulated on 15.06.1999.;