MALCOM LAWRENCE CECIL DSOUZA Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(SC)-1975-5-15
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on
May 01,1975
MALCOM LAWRENCE CECIL D'SOUZA
Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
S K GHOSH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]UNION OF INDIA VS. VASANTJAYARAMKARNIK [RELIED ON]
Cited Judgements :-
K R MUDGAL VS. R P SINGH [LAWS(SC)-1986-9-69] [RELIED ON]RAGHUNATH SAHU VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2024-5-12] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL VISHWASH VS. HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(P&H)-1992-1-216] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV BHARDWAJ VS. STATE OF H P [LAWS(HPH)-2021-3-64] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR GUHA VS. CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(CAL)-2013-5-19] [REFERRED TO]
KAMLA SHARMA SMT VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION [LAWS(ALL)-2000-9-132] [REFERRED TO]
ASHA SAXENA VS. S K CHAUDHARI [LAWS(ALL)-1990-12-12] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHMA SHARMA VS. STATE [LAWS(J&K)-2020-2-37] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2016-6-20] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH KUMAR SINGH VS. RAJEEV NAIN UPADHYAY [LAWS(ALL)-2019-12-13] [REFERRED TO]
MAJOR ARUN KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2019-11-16] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND VS. GAURI SHANKAR JOSHI [LAWS(UTN)-2019-11-17] [REFERRED TO]
SUNITA PANDEY VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2020-7-9] [REFERRED TO]
SHIBA SHANKAR MOHAPATRA AND ORS. VS. STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS. [LAWS(SC)-2009-11-102] [REFERRED TO]
G C GUPTA VS. N K PANDEY [LAWS(SC)-1987-12-35] [RELIED ON]
S. MARI VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2022-8-117] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR VS. JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA [LAWS(DLH)-2021-11-136] [REFERRED TO]
WASI ULLAH SIDDIQUI VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-1991-11-27] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. CHANDER MOHAN [LAWS(P&H)-2014-2-45] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV BHARDWAJ AND ORS. VS. STATE OF H.P AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-2020-3-104] [REFERRED TO]
Y. USHARANI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2014-11-12] [REFERRED TO]
PAN SINGH BANGARI VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2019-5-175] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY D. DHUMASKAR VS. STATE OF GOA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-3-146] [REFERRED TO]
PRAFULLA KUMAR MISHRA VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-8-75] [REFERRED TO]
RAKESH AWASTHI VS. STATE OF U P THROUGH PRIN SECY INDUSTRIAL DEPTT LK [LAWS(ALL)-2018-4-355] [REFERRED TO]
NARESH TRIKAMLAL BRAHMBHATT VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2002-2-89] [REFERRED]
SARWAN RAM VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2017-6-4] [REFERRED TO]
PAVITHRAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2009-8-16] [REFERRED TO]
BASUDEO PURVEY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1983-2-7] [REFERRED TO]
S. SUSAIPACKIAM VS. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2014-2-254] [REFERRED TO]
S. MALAR VS. REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF MADRAS [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-950] [REFERRED TO]
NAZARUDEEN A VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2010-12-345] [REFERRED TO]
N K RAJASEKARAN VS. COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ PANAGAL BUILDING [LAWS(MAD)-2010-4-324] [REFERRED TO]
MEGHANA DILIP TALEKAR VS. MAHARASHTRA LEGISLATURE SECRETARIAT [LAWS(BOM)-2019-7-62] [REFERRED TO]
MS VEENA KOTHAVALE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2018-1-458] [REFERRED TO]
A N MEMAN VS. HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1987-9-25] [REFERRED TO]
NIRAJ KUMAR VS. COAL INDIA LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2023-2-119] [REFERRED TO]
KISHORI MOHAN DASGUPTA VS. DAMODAR VALLEY CORPORATION & ORS [LAWS(CAL)-1988-11-12] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI SHANKER PATHAK VS. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS [LAWS(ALL)-2002-5-145] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. TEXMACO LTD [LAWS(ALL)-2007-10-111] [REFERRED TO]
VINCENTS HOME AND OTHERS VS. MRS. HASI SEN AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2018-9-192] [REFERRED TO]
R S MAKASHI VS. I M MENON [LAWS(SC)-1981-12-17] [RELIED ON]
KU NILOFAR INSAF VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-1991-8-33] [RELIED ON]
PROVINCIAL DAUGHTERS OF CROSS ST VINCENTS HOME AND OTHERS VS. HASI SEN AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2018-9-72] [REFERRED TO]
DR.A.AUGUSTIN VS. KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY [LAWS(KER)-2016-2-205] [REFERRED TO]
S. RAVIKUMAR VS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE ADMINISTRATION [LAWS(MAD)-2021-8-49] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. SUKH RAM SINGH ALIAS S R SINGH [LAWS(CAL)-1993-7-20] [REFERRED TO]
PARMANAND SAI VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2018-4-22] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH SUBRAHMANYA KALLAGE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2017-5-109] [REFERRED TO]
SACHIN SHARADCHANDRA DEOLE VS. EDUCATION OFFICER (SECONDARY), ZILLA PARISHAD AMRAVATI [LAWS(BOM)-2022-3-158] [REFERRED TO]
SHIBA SHANKAR MOHAPATRA VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(SC)-2009-11-26] [REFERRED TO]
PERVESH KUMARI VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2024-5-15] [REFERRED TO]
L M PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2004-9-1] [REFERRED TO]
S VENKATESH VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU, FORT ST GEORGE, CHENNAI [LAWS(MAD)-2020-8-267] [REFERRED TO]
V. VINCENT VELANKANNI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2024-9-78] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY KUMAR SHUKLA VS. ARVIND RAI [LAWS(SC)-2021-12-21] [REFERRED TO]
K. RAJAKUMAR AND ORS. VS. CHENNAI METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-8-95] [REFERRED TO]
MANAGER PERINGATHUR MUSLIM L P SCHOOL VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2006-12-64] [REFERRED TO]
RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2004-12-208] [REFERRED TO]
NIWAS SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2007-10-126] [REFERRED TO]
A. LAKSHIMIPATHI RAO VS. B.R. RAMABHADRAIAH AND OTHER [LAWS(APH)-1983-3-48] [REFERRED TO]
MCD VS. SUDHIR KUMAR [LAWS(DLH)-2010-12-35] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL KUMAR DWIVEDI VS. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-5-71] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH SINGH AND ORS VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2016-8-127] [REFERRED]
DHEERAJMITRA MISRA VS. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. [LAWS(J&K)-2015-6-22] [REFERRED TO]
IQBAL AHMAD VS. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. [LAWS(J&K)-2016-3-61] [REFERRED TO]
S.C.KAINTHLA VS. STATE OF H.P [LAWS(HPH)-2019-5-61] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPAK MATHUR AND ORS. VS. RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDHYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD. AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-11-74] [REFERRED TO]
I.K.G. SWAMY VS. THE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(MAD)-1996-12-67] [REFERRED TO]
LEELA BISHT VS. PAN SINGH [LAWS(UTN)-2019-11-76] [REFERRED TO]
POST GRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH VS. ARUN KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2020-8-16] [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA SINGH BHANDARI VS. STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2016-5-104] [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL JAWAD M.F. AND ORS. VS. R. RAJ PRADEEP AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2016-3-9] [REFERRED TO]
DR. SATYA PRAKASH VS. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2009-5-321] [REFERRED TO]
ASSTT. COMDTT. SUNIL DOBRIYAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2021-7-168] [REFERRED TO]
J B SHARMA VS. UOI & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2019-4-101] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR GUHA VS. CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(CAL)-2013-3-93] [REFERRED TO (PARAS 29,39) (8)]
SANTOSH SHRIRAM GAWHANKAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-11-89] [REFERRED TO]
DR. RITA WAHAL VS. CHANCELLOR, KING GEORGES MEDICAL UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW & 3 ORS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-25] [REFERRED TO]
M R SATHYAMURTHY VS. UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS [LAWS(MAD)-1996-7-56] [REFERRED TO]
ANURADHA SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(UTN)-2023-12-5] [REFERRED TO]
BHARTESH KUMAR JAIN VS. STATE OF M P AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-4-70] [REFERRED TO]
VINODBALA BIHARILAL RAVAL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2001-5-6] [REFERRED]
A. GOBINATH VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU, FORT ST GEORGE, CHENNAI [LAWS(MAD)-2020-8-266] [REFERRED TO]
S KRISHNAKUMAR VS. STATE OF TAMILNADU [LAWS(MAD)-2011-8-145] [REFERRED]
SARVJEET YADAV VS. DIRECTOR EDUCATION (SECONDARY) AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-12-111] [REFERRED TO]
BIRENDRA NATH JHA VS. COAL INDIA LTD. AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-1995-2-36] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
H . R. Khanna, J. -
(1.)This is a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by Malcom Lawrence Cecil D'souza. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax for an appropriate writ to quash the seniority list of the Additional Commissioners of Income-tax as on February 1, 1971 circulated by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance. The petitioner claims that he is senior to respondents 4 to 26, but in the impugned list he is shown junior to those respondents. Prayer has also been made by the petitioner for other consequential reliefs. Apart from respondents 4 to 26. the petitioner has impleaded the Union of India, the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue and the Chairman,Central Board of Direct Taxes as respondents1 to 3.
(2.)The petitioner served in the Royal Navy as a Sublieutenant from March 1945 till November 1946 when he was released from the naval service because of the end of war. On July 1,1947 the petitioner was appointed Income-tax Officer Class II. On August 12, 1949 the Petitioner was appointed Income-tax Officer Class I Grade II in post-1945 vacancy reserved for candidates with war service. On January 24, 1950 a seniority list of Income-tax Officers Class I Grade II as on January 1. 1950 was issued on the basis of 1947 Seniority Rules. The petitioner was shown in that list senior to respondents 4 to 26. The same position was reflected in a seniority list issued in 1953. The petitioner was promoted as Income-tax officer Class I Grade I with effect from January 1, 1951 and confirmed in that post from the said date,
(3.)According to 1947 Rules, the seniority of candidates inter se appointed to post-1945 vacancies was to be determined by age irrespective of the category from which they were recruited. The Rules of 1947 were revised and in super-session of them 1952 Seniority Rules were issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. According, inter alia, to 1952 Seniority Rules, the break in service was not to be taken into account for determining the seniority of persons confirmed against post-1945 war reserved vacancies. The Income-tax Department took some time to revise the seniority list of Income-tax officers class I in accordance with 1952 Seniority Rules and finally on November 26, 1956 the revised seniority list of Income-tax, Officers Class I Grade I as on October, 1, 1956 was issued. In this list respondents 4 to 26 were shown senior to the petitioner and were entitled to be promoted to higher posts earlier than the petitioner. Another seniority list of Assistant Commissioners was issued as on January 1, 1958. This list was in accordance with the earlier list of Income-tax Officers as on October 1, 1956 showing the petitioner to be junior to respondents 4 to 26 . It may be stated that by this time the petitioner and respondents 4 to 26 had all been promoted Assistant Commissioners.
(2.)The petitioner served in the Royal Navy as a Sublieutenant from March 1945 till November 1946 when he was released from the naval service because of the end of war. On July 1,1947 the petitioner was appointed Income-tax Officer Class II. On August 12, 1949 the Petitioner was appointed Income-tax Officer Class I Grade II in post-1945 vacancy reserved for candidates with war service. On January 24, 1950 a seniority list of Income-tax Officers Class I Grade II as on January 1. 1950 was issued on the basis of 1947 Seniority Rules. The petitioner was shown in that list senior to respondents 4 to 26. The same position was reflected in a seniority list issued in 1953. The petitioner was promoted as Income-tax officer Class I Grade I with effect from January 1, 1951 and confirmed in that post from the said date,
(3.)According to 1947 Rules, the seniority of candidates inter se appointed to post-1945 vacancies was to be determined by age irrespective of the category from which they were recruited. The Rules of 1947 were revised and in super-session of them 1952 Seniority Rules were issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. According, inter alia, to 1952 Seniority Rules, the break in service was not to be taken into account for determining the seniority of persons confirmed against post-1945 war reserved vacancies. The Income-tax Department took some time to revise the seniority list of Income-tax officers class I in accordance with 1952 Seniority Rules and finally on November 26, 1956 the revised seniority list of Income-tax, Officers Class I Grade I as on October, 1, 1956 was issued. In this list respondents 4 to 26 were shown senior to the petitioner and were entitled to be promoted to higher posts earlier than the petitioner. Another seniority list of Assistant Commissioners was issued as on January 1, 1958. This list was in accordance with the earlier list of Income-tax Officers as on October 1, 1956 showing the petitioner to be junior to respondents 4 to 26 . It may be stated that by this time the petitioner and respondents 4 to 26 had all been promoted Assistant Commissioners.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.