Date:25/02/2007 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/02/25/stories/2007022504151200.htm

National

Temporary appointments: ruling stays

Legal Correspondent

Apex court declines to review its order

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has declined to review its ruling that a government employee appointed temporarily to discharge functions in a particular post cannot be said to be in service till such time as his appointment is regularised.

The court held that it is only from the date of regularisation such appointee can claim seniority over others.

A Bench of Justice A.R. Lakshmanan and Justice Altamas Kabir reiterated the ruling, viz appointments made contrary to the rules were merely fortuitous and did not confer the benefit of seniority on appointees over and above the regular/substantive appointees to the service.

Dismissing a petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Government seeking review of the July 2006 judgment, the Bench said, "This review petition has been filed by the State of Tamil Nadu and the Inspector-General of Registration with the intention of re-opening all the issues which have been finally decided. We see no merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed."

The Bench also dismissed a similar review petition filed by N. Nallamuthu and others.

While accepting the proposition of law laid down by the court they contended that it would not apply to the present case.

The Bench had laid down the law in the petition filed by K. Madalaimuthu and A. Arumuga Nainar, who were then Assistant Inspectors-General of Registration questioning the fixation of their seniority.

Allowing the appeal, the apex court said "a direct recruit takes his seniority from the date on which he starts discharging the duty of the post borne on the cadre while a temporary appointee appointed de hors the rules or on ad hoc basis or to a fortuitous vacancy gets seniority from the date of regular appointment."

The State in its petition said that if the July 2006 judgment was not reviewed it would result in grave problems for the State Government not only in respect of fixation of seniority in the Registration Department but would have larger and serious repercussions in all other State departments where temporary appointments were being made for administrative reasons.