Jaswant Singh Vs. District and Sessions Judge, Delhi and Others

Jaswant Singh vs District and Sessions Judge, Delhi and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Jun 01, 2001

~7 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/697553

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/697553
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Mr. Anil Dev Singh and; Mr. O.P. Dwivedi, JJ.
Decided On: Jun 01, 2001
Case Number: L.P.A. No. 64 of 1995
Subject: Service

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Delhi High Court Act, 1966 - Section 10--Letters Patent Appeal--Appeal against the dismissal order of writ petition--Departmental appeal rejected--Appellant a typist/LDC--Promoted later on in year 1985 Govt. upgraded 19 posts--Placed 19 stenographers in the revised pay scale--Appellant being scheduled caste candidat...

Key legal issue: Service

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jaswant Singh

Advocate Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Adv

Respondent

District and Sessions Judge, Delhi and Others

Advocate Mr. Nanak Chand Superintendent and ; Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, Adv.

Legal References

Reported In: 93(2001)DLT552; 2001(59)DRJ667

Excerpt

delhi high court act, 1966 - section 10--letters patent appeal--appeal against the dismissal order of writ petition--departmental appeal rejected--appellant a typist/ldc--promoted later on in year 1985 govt. upgraded 19 posts--placed 19 stenographers in the revised pay scale--appellant being scheduled caste candidate placed in first position--in seniority list he was at 19th number--senior stenographer died--2nd number appointed--held, f.r. 9(24) merely provides a formula for calculation of the pay in a presumed posting--it does not denote the actual posting--factual posting of an employee cannot be changed after his death--although he could be granted benefits which could have accrued to him due to some later developments on presumptive basis--no vacancy can be said to have arisen in that scale--no fault in the office order--meritless appeal dismissed. - .....the appellant also filed a review application against the order dated 4th october, 1989, rejecting his departmental appeal. the review was also dismissed.5. the appellant then filed writ petition no. 3073/91 seeking appropriate writ/direction or order quashing the order of the district & sessions judge, dated 13th september, 1985 delhi and also the order dated 4th october 1989 passed by the high court in the departmental appeal. by the impugned order dated 1st february, 1995 the writ petition was dismissed by the learned single judge repelling the appellant's contention on the basis of the om dated 29th april, 1975 and other o.ms. referred to above. feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal.6. we have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as also the written submissions filed on 5th may, 2001 by the learned counsel for the appellant.7. in this appeal, learned counsel for the appellant has not pressed the point that because of his placement at seriall no. 1 in the list prepared for the purpose of grant of revised scale of rs. 425-700 in accordance with the 40 point roster, the appellant became senior most and thereforee automatically entitled to the grant of next higher scale of rs. 550-900. it was conceded by the learned counsel for the appellant at the time of arguments as also in para 3 and 4 of his written submissions that mr. s.k. joshi was senior most stenographer. so no objection can be taken to his appointment in the higher pay scale of rs. 550-900 initially with effect from 1st january, 1973 till his death on 21st december, 1973. the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that on the death of mr. s.k. joshi on 21st december, 1973, second vacancy arose on the same post during the year 1973 and thereforee this time the vacancy should have been treated to be reserved by virtue of o.m. dated 29th april, 1975 particularly clause 6 thereof.8. as against this, the submission of the learned counsel for the.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

O.P. Dwivedi, J.

1. This appeal under section 10 of the Letters Patent Act is directed against the order dated 1st February, 1995 whereby the learned single Judge dismissed appellant's writ petition No. 3073/91. In the said writ petition the appellant had sought quashing of order dated 4th October 1989 passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.C. Goel rejecting the departmental appeal preferred by the appellant against the office order of the District & sessions judge, Delhi dated 13th September, 1985 whereby earlier order dated 9th May, 1985 placing the appellant in the higher scale Rs. 550-900 with effect from 22nd December 1973 was recalled.

2. Briefly stated the facts relating to this appeal are as under:-

The appellant was appointed as a typist (LDC) in the pay scale Rs. 55-110 with effect from 12th October 1955 in the office of the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi. In the year 1964 he was promoted as Steno-Typist in the pay scale of Rs. 110-180 + Rs. 20/- as special pay. In December 1965 he was promoted to the post of stenographer in the pay scale of Rs. 130-300 and he was confirmed in the said post on 6th July, 1976. He was later on appointed as Superintendent in the office of District & Sessions Judge, Delhi with effect from 29th May, 1981 and served in the said post till his retirement on 28th February, 1993.

3. In the year 1985 Government upgraded 19 posts of stenographers to the scale of Rs. 425-700 with effect form 1st January, 1973. Accordingly, the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi placed 19 stenographers in the revised pay scale of Rs. 425-700 and the petitioner being Scheduled Caste candidate was placed in the first position according to the 40 point roster. In the same year i.e. in the year 1985, the Government created one post in the higher scale of Rs. 550-900 for the stenographers with effect from 1st January, 1973. So the the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi issued an order dated 9th May, 1985 whereby the appellant was placed in the said pay scale of Rs. 550-900 form 22nd December, 1973 after the death of the senior most stenographer MR. S.K. Joshi, who died on 21st December, 1973. It may be pointed out here that in the seniority list of stenographers Mr. S.K. Joshi figured at Seriall No.1 and Mr. M.M. Manchanda figured at Seriall No. 2. The appellant's position in the seniority list was 19th. Feeling aggrieved by the placement of the petitioner in the higher scale of Rs.550-900 with effect from 22nd December, 1973, Mr. Manchanda made a representation to the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi and thereupon the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi withdrew the order dated 9th May, 1985 whereby the appellant was placed in the hight pay scale of Rs. 550-900 from 22nd December, 1973 and instead passed order dated 13th September 1985 whereby Mr. Manchanda was placed in the senior scale from 1st January, 1973 onwards whereas Mr. S.K. Joshi was shown to have drawn presumptive pay of the said post from 1st January, 1973 till his death on 21st December, 1973 under FR 9 (24). Aggrieved by order dated 13th September, 1985, the appellant made representation to the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi which was rejected. He preferred a departmental appeal to the High Court but same was dismissed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.C.Goel vide order dated 4th October, 1989. The appellant's contention in his departmental appeal was that since he was placed at Seriall No.1 in the office order issued by the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi on 9th May, 1985 placing 19 stenographers in the revised pay scale of Rs. 425-700 he become entitled to be put in the next higher pay scale of Rs. 550-900 with effect from 1st January, 1973, he being at the top of list. Alternatively it was contended that by applying 40 point roster also the first vacancy should have gone to him he being a scheduled caste candidate. Both these contentions of the appellant were rejected by Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.C. Goel on the ground that inter se seniority of the stenographers remains unaltered even though the appellant being a scheduled caste candidate, was shown at Seriall No.1 for the purpose of allotment of vacancy in accordance with the 40 point roster. This was so held in view of the following O. Ms :-

1. OM 10/15/73-Estt (SCT) dated 24th May, 1974.

2. OM 1/11/79-Estt (SCT) dated 22nd April, 1970.

3. OM 1/3/72-Estt (SCT) dated 12th March, 1973.

4. The other contention of the appellant that being a schedule caste candidate he should have been given the next higher pay scale of Rs. 550-900 with effect form 1st January, 1973 was negatived on the basis of OM.No. 1/9/74-Estt (SCT) dated 29th April, 1975 which provided that when there is only one vacancy is a particular year it had to be treated as unreserved. The appellant also filed a review application against the order dated 4th October, 1989, rejecting his departmental appeal. The review was also dismissed.

5. The appellant then filed writ petition No. 3073/91 seeking appropriate writ/direction or order quashing the order of the District & Sessions Judge, dated 13th September, 1985 Delhi and also the order dated 4th October 1989 passed by the High Court in the departmental appeal. By the impugned order dated 1st February, 1995 the writ petition was dismissed by the learned single Judge repelling the appellant's contention on the basis of the OM dated 29th April, 1975 and other O.Ms. referred to above. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has preferred this appeal.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as also the written submissions filed on 5th May, 2001 by the learned counsel for the appellant.

7. In this appeal, learned counsel for the appellant has not pressed the point that because of his placement at Seriall No. 1 in the list prepared for the purpose of grant of revised scale of Rs. 425-700 in accordance with the 40 point roster, the appellant became senior most and thereforee automatically entitled to the grant of next higher scale of Rs. 550-900. It was conceded by the learned counsel for the appellant at the time of arguments as also in para 3 and 4 of his written submissions that Mr. S.K. Joshi was senior most stenographer. So no objection can be taken to his appointment in the higher pay scale of Rs. 550-900 initially with effect from 1st January, 1973 till his death on 21st December, 1973. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that on the death of Mr. S.K. Joshi on 21st December, 1973, second vacancy arose on the same post during the year 1973 and thereforee this time the vacancy should have been treated to be reserved by virtue of O.M. dated 29th April, 1975 particularly clause 6 thereof.

8. As against this, the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent was that since the senior most stenographer Mr. S.K. Joshi was already working on deputation as Branch in charge, copying agency before 1st January, 1973 till his death on 21st December, 1973, Mr. M.M. Manchanda who was second in the order of seniority occupied the said post of stenographer in the pay scale of Rs. 550-900 with effect from 1st January, 1973 for the first time and continued to do so even after the death of Mr. Joshi. According to the learned counsel for the respondent no vacancy arose in the scale of Rs. 550-900 on the death of Mr. Joshi on 21st December 1973 so the question of appointment of the appellant to the said scale did not arise. Mr. Joshi being senior most stenographer was simply presumed to be in the scale of Rs. 550-900 from 1st January, 1973 to 21st December, 1973 under FR 9 (24) for the purpose of calculating his dues but actually Mr. Joshi was never appointed to that post.

9. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and we are of the view that the appellant's contention that on the death of Mr. Joshi on 21st December 1983, vacancy arose for the second time in the pay scale of Rs. 550-900 can not be upheld. One post in the higher scale of Rs. 550-900 was created for the stenographers vide letter No. F/9/84-Judl./661 dated 28th March, 1985 from the Law and Judicial Department, Government of NCT of Delhi. Accordingly, the District & Sessions Judge issued impugned office orders dated 8th May, 1985 and 13th September, 1985 which are reproduced below for facility of reference:-

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE: DELHI

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2001 Same Parties Jaswant Singh vs District and Sessions Judge, Delhi and Others Same Subject Service Same Judge Mr. Anil Dev Singh and; Mr. O.P. Dwivedi, JJ.

Service