KUMARI GURBIR CHANDOK Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION, THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, DELHI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the final seniority list circulated on 14th April, 1972 by respondent No. 2 Director of Education and also the list of the Selection Grade of the Post Graduate Teachers issued on 4th January.

(2.) The petitioner was working as a Trained Graduate Teacher under the Delhi Administration since 1-2-57. The next promotion is to a Post Graduate Teacher. By an order dated 14th July, 1961 she was promoted as officiating Post Graduate Teacher in History (female) against the promotion quota on ad hoc basis The recruitment for the post of Post Graduate Teacher shows that it is a selection post. There are two methods of recruitment, 50 per cent being by direct recruitment and 50 per cent by promotion. There is a separate seniority list for trained graduate teachers and language teachers. The promotion from the department is made on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee. The promotion to a Post Graduate Teacher is made according to the vacancies in each subject. As the Departmental Promotion Committee's meetings are not held often, to meet the reeds to ad-hoc appointments are made and later those cases are placed before the Committee for approval, which is called regularisation. The regularisation is done on academic basis i.e. between 1st May and 30th April, of the subsequent year. Any person regularly appointed against the vacancy of a particular academic year is treated for the purpose of seniority to have been regularised with effect from 15th July of that year when school reopens after the summer vacations. Even if a person so regularised joins the post subsequent to 15th July and his salary in higher grade is paid w.e.f. the date he assumes charge but for the purpose of seniority, the date of regularisation remains the same for all appointees in a particular academic year.

(3.) This is done to eliminate the effect of fortuitous circumstances of delay in sending of demands by schools. All those persons who are so regularised for a particular year they then placed in the seniority list according to the length of service in the cadre from which they have been promoted which in the present case would be the trained graduate teachers. By an order, dated 14th July, 1961, she was promoted as officiating Post Graduate Teacher in History (female) against the promotion quota, on ad hoc basis. The petitioner was regularised against the vacancies for the years 1962 63, by Departmental Promotion Committee. In the final seniority list of Post Graduate Teachers (female) circulated by respondent No 2, the petitioner is shown at serial No. 262 The petitioner claims that she should be shown between S. No. 118 and 119 if the date of her appointment as Post Graduate Teacher is counted from 14th July, 1961 when she was promoted on ad hoc basis or at between S. No. 209 and 210 if seniority was to be counted from the date, her service regularised as Post Graduate Teacher for the year 1962-63 by Departmental Promotion Committee w.e.f. 15th July, 1962 and, therefore, seniority list is illegal. The petitioner's name also does not figure in the selection grade of Post Graduate Teachers (Annexure K). Apparently this is because the petitioner is shown as junior in the in seniority is to all the persons who hive been given selection grade. Mr. Saharia does not dispute that the selection grade has been given on the basis of seniority shown in Annexure I. The position regarding selection grade(Annexure K) will automatically follow from the position id final seniority list. We are, therefore, in this case concerned primarily with the grievance of the petitioner with regard to final seniority list Annexure (1).