- (1.) THESE writ petitions, preferred by the incumbents holding the post of Inspector of Income Tax and by the department, are directed against the common order dated 08.09.2003 as passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur ('the CAT') in 4 connected Original Applications (OA Nos.270, 271, 275 and 293/2002) in relation to the dispute of seniority between the direct recruits and promotees. Two of the OAs, bearing Nos.270/2002 (R.K. Bohra Vs. UOI & Ors.) and 293/2002 (Ranjeet Singh Rathore Vs. UOI & Ors.) had been by the applicants who were selected to the post of Inspector of Income Tax in the year 1989 and joined respectively on 25.01.1989 and 17.01.1989 in Gujarat Circle. Both of them requested for their inter-state transfer from Gujarat to Rajasthan; and such requests were accepted under the communications dated 30.03.1992 and 20.02.1992 respectively. Pursuant to the transfer orders, the applicant of OA No.270/2002 Shri R.K. Bohra joined at Jodhpur on 13.04.1992 and of OA No.293/2002 Shri Ranjeet Singh Rathore joined at Jodhpur on 23.06.1992. The applicant of OA No.271/2002 Shri G.R. Chalana has been promoted on the post of Inspector of Income Tax and joined as such on 06.08.1993. The applicant of OA No.275/2002 Shri Bhanwar Lal Soni has also been a promottee who joined as Inspector on 10.08.1993.
(2.) IN the OAs aforesaid, filed in respect of the dispute of the seniority between the promotees on one hand and direct recruits on the other, the CAT accepted the contentions urged by the applicants and, while quashing the impugned seniority list, directed the official respondents to refix the seniority of the applicants and the private respondents in the light of the observations made in the impugned order dated 08.09.2003. In these writ petitions, filed in challenge to the order aforesaid, it was given out on the earlier occasions before this Court that the basic issue was pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as arising from a judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court; and hence, these petitions were adjourned from time to time.
(3.) TODAY , the learned counsel for the parties submit ad idem that the controversy has finally been adjudicated and pronounced upon by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated 27.11.2012 as passed in a batch of appeals led by Civil Appeals Nos.7514- 7515/2005 : Union of India and Ors. Vs. N.R. Parmar and Ors. It is also submitted that now, the re-assignment of seniority shall have to be carried out by the department pursuant to and in conformity with the order as made and directions as issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. For ready reference, we may refer to the operative part of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as under : - "33. Having interpreted the effect of the OMs dated 7.2.1986 and 3.7.1986 (in paragraphs 20 and 21 hereinabove), we are satisfied, that not only the requisition but also the advertisement for direct recruitment was issued by the SSC in the recruitment year in which direct recruit vacancies had arisen. The said factual position, as confirmed by the rival parties, is common in all matters being collectively disposed of. In all these cases the advertised vacancies were filled up in the original/first examination/selection conducted for the same. None of the direct recruit Income Tax Inspectors herein can be stated to be occupying carried forward vacancies, or vacancies which came to be filled up by a "later" examination/selection process. The facts only reveal, that the examination and the selection process of direct recruits could not be completed within the recruitment year itself. For this, the modification/amendment in the manner of determining the inter-se seniority between the direct recruits and promotees, carried out through the OM dated 7.2.1986, and the compilation of the instructions pertaining to seniority in the OM dated 3.7.1986, leave no room for any doubt, that the "rotation of quotas" principle, would be fully applicable to the direct recruits in the present controversy. The direct recruits herein will therefore have to be interspaced with promotees of the same recruitment year. 34. In view of the above, the Civil Appeals, the Transferred Case, as well as, the Transfer Case (filed by the direct recruits and the Union of India) are hereby allowed. The claim of the promotees, that the direct recruit Income Tax Inspectors, in the instant case should be assigned seniority with reference to the date of their actual appointment in the Income Tax Department is declined." ;