BALESHWAR DASS & ORS. ETC versus STATE OF U. P. & ORS. ETC.
Appointment in a substantive capacity for purposes of seniority does not require appointment to a permanent post. If a temporary Assistant Engineer fulfills all requirements (including completion of probation and Public Service Commission approval), he is to be regarded as appointed in a substantive capacity for seniority. Officiating service should be counted for seniority if regular and not ad hoc, provided the statutory requirements are met. The seniority list should be based on the date of appointment in a substantive capacity, and the difference between permanent and temporary posts is less relevant where the rules regard even temporary appointees as part of the service.
- Parties
- Appellant/petitioner: Baleshwar Dass & Ors.; Respondent: State of U. P. & Ors.
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 19 August 1980
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal & Writ Petition / Appeal From High Court Judgment and Writ Petitions Under Article 32
- Outcome
- Appeals partly allowed; petitions dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Seniority Determination, Service Matters, Temporary Versus Permanent Appointment, Appointment in Substantive Capacity
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Baleshwar Dass & Ors.
Appellant/petitioner
State of U. P. & Ors.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal & Writ Petition / Appeal From High Court Judgment and Writ Petitions Under Article 32
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether officiating/temporary service of Assistant Engineers could count for seniority in the service
- 2 Meaning of 'substantive capacity' under Rules governing service appointments
- 3 Whether appointment to a substantive capacity must be to a permanent post or can be temporary
Ratio Decidendi
Appointment in a substantive capacity for purposes of seniority does not require appointment to a permanent post. If a temporary Assistant Engineer fulfills all requirements (including completion of probation and Public Service Commission approval), he is to be regarded as appointed in a substantive capacity for seniority. Officiating service should be counted for seniority if regular and not ad hoc, provided the statutory requirements are met. The seniority list should be based on the date of appointment in a substantive capacity, and the difference between permanent and temporary posts is less relevant where the rules regard even temporary appointees as part of the service.
Court Disposition
Appeals partly allowed; petitions dismissed.
Orders
- Seniority list prepared by the State quashed; fresh seniority list to be prepared in light of the principles laid down.
- Parties to be heard by the Government before preparing the new list; principles recorded in the judgment to govern.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment