Page 65 - TELEWAVE JUNE-2016

posts with effect from 15.10.1993, thus, giving them seniority under the old Rules. Hence, the creation of these posts with retrospective effect as well as promotion of 1966 persons without clear declaration of vacancies before the new Rules i.e. 23.07.1996, was challenged. The vacancies arising after 23.07.1996, shall be filled as per the R/Rules 1996. 3. On 05.10.2009 DOT in a reply statement stated: “In the year 1998 the Department has issued an order dated 15th October, 1998 creating 1966 posts of SDE and it is indicated that those posts are deemed to have been created along with 2636 posts in 1993 itself for the purpose of preventing reversion of 550 regularly promoted officers.“ 4. There is a distinction between the vacancies and creation of posts. Vacancies can be located pertaining to the previous years. Posts cannot be created with retrospective effect. 5. The Department should have carried out Circle wise exercise to find out vacancies between 15.10.1993 to 23.07.1996 and justify these 1966 posts. 6. It is seen from the Kerala High Court judgment that some LDCE posts and SC/ST posts were also to be filled after the Special Supplementary Qualifying-cum-Competitive Examination, made the revision of 1966 seniority issue more complicated and the department could not finalize the list earlier. 7. The argument do not go beyond the point that since the reversion of 1966 officers has been annulled by the orders of the High Courts of Kerala and Delhi, therefore, they will remain senior. We cannot agree with this. The only protection that the 1966 reverted officers have been granted is a protection from their reversion compared to the promotion of many more junior officers promoted on 26.04.2000. But, it cannot be against the present applicants whose case stands supported by the judgment of this Bench in OA 624/1997 as well as 946, 1034/1998 and 94/1999, also supported by the judgment of High Court of Karnataka in WP No. 43253-43255/1999. 8. On 15.10.1993 the Department had a vacancy position of (-) 2636 posts of TES Group ‘B’. If that be so, how could the Department issue orders on 15.10.1998 creating 1966 posts with effect from the same date of creation of 2636 posts, i.e., with effect from 15.10.1993. This situation has now been corrected and the Department agrees that the supernumerary posts are not from 15.10.1993 but from 21.10.1998 onwards. 9. It is not understood as to how the department which had already over-drawn 2636 vacancies on 15.10.1993, was still having 4200 vacancies on 23.07.1996, i.e., within a span of 3 years. 10. DOT produced no records to show their circle wise vacancies nor any record to show whether any promotions were given between 15.10.1993 to 22.07.1996 against those vacancies. It would be much better if the department dealt with this issue circle wise. 11. BSNL had tried to explain that “in view of various judgments of the High Courts of Kerala and Delhi, the continuous promotion of 1966 JTOs as TES Group ‘B’ has remained protected. Its order dated 09.03.2009 is an outcome of those judgments and the hands of the department are tied up and hence the same order cannot be quashed.” 12. We cannot overlook the department’s own contention that these 1369 supernumerary posts have been created from 21.10.1998 to 25.04.2000. 13. The date of recruitment of both groups be compared and strictly as per the comparison, their seniority should be finalized and the existing seniority lists be modified to that extent within two months. Consequential financial benefits based on the notional seniority will accrue from the date of this order. 18.04.2012-CAT-MS – OA No. 1216/ 2010 1. DOT had revised the seniority list issued on 12.01.2005 by another list issued on 26.10.2009 without proper notice to the affected parties. 2. The respondents being the public authority are expected to work and act in a transparent manner. Any action which is taken to decide seniority issue between the applicants and the private respondents, the same should have been done with the full acknowledgment of the parties whose interests are affected. TELEWAVE 65 JUNE-2016