260. Daily Rules Recap - Creation of additional posts in the Department of Posts

 One Day, One Minute, One Rule --– 46

46. What was the court's decision in the case of V. Sathi Raju v. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad, regarding the fixation of seniority and payment of arrears?
The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Hyderabad, in the case of V. Sathi Raju v. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad, ruled that fixing seniority based on the date of confirmation in the cadre is unconstitutional and discriminatory. The Tribunal's decision was based on an earlier Supreme Court ruling in C.A. Nos. 21410-13 of 1996, which held that continuous service should be taken into account for seniority.

The tribunal, therefore, set aside the impugned order of December 30, 2002, and directed the respondents to promote the applicant, V. Sathi Raju, to the post of Head Clerk/Office Superintendent on par with his juniors, taking the date of his entry into service as LDC as the date for fixation of his seniority.
Regarding the payment of arrears of salary, the tribunal referenced a Supreme Court judgment (State of Haryana v. O.P. Gupta [1996 (7) SCC 533]) which stated that if a promotee has not worked on the promotional post, they are not entitled to arrears of salary from the deemed date of promotion. Therefore, the applicant was only entitled to a notional fixation of pay in the promotional post and all other consequential benefits, but not arrears of salary. He would be entitled to the enhanced pay only from the date he took over the charge of the promotional post.