Seniority

  1. Seniority list prepared according to rules — objections invited — Matter considered in the light of relevant law — Not revisable by the preparing authority or Selection Board. Khizar Mahmood Qureshi  v. Azad J & K Govt. and others 1992 SCR 223 (A)
  2. Seniority is to be determined under the law which was applicable at the time of appointment. Rehmat Ullah Zia v. Aziz-ud-Din Qureshi 1993 SCR 208 (B)
  3. Seniority cannot be claimed from the date of ad hoc appointment which term is synonymous with the term ‘temporary appointment’. Ghulam Mustafa Qureshi v. Azad Govt. 1994 SCR 227 (G)
  4. Period spent by the civil servants on ad hoc or temporary appointments cannot be counted towards seniority. Ghulam Mustafa Qureshi v. Azad Government and others 1994 SCR 227 (H)
  5. Mere fact that respondent passed B.Ed. examination before the appellant would not entitle him to seniority — Appellant was allocated senior scale with retrospective effect and no remedy was sought against said order before proper forum. Javid Ahmad Khan v. Pervaiz Akhtar Abbasi and 5 others 1998 SCR 278 (A)
  6. Seniority would be reckoned from the date of regular appointment in a grade. Muhammad Ilyas Khan and 6 others v. Muhammad Hafeez Khan and 3 others 2000 SCR 630 (B)
  7. Seniority in the grade to which a civil servant is promoted shall take effect from the date of regular appointment to a post in that grade. Nazar Ahmed Khan v. Sabir H. Naqvi 2000 SCR 580 (A)
  8. Seniority of a civil servant would be reckoned from the date of his regular promotion — As Sardar Muhammad Hafeez Khan was regularly promoted from 1987, his seniority would be reckoned from the said date, irrespective of fact as to whether the retrospective effect to his promotion from 1987 was legal or not, because that was not challenged by petitioner and had attained finality. M. Ilyas Khan and 5 others v. Muhammad Hafeez Khan and 4 others 2001 SCR 179 (B)
  9. Practice — Contention that it has been a long standing practice that the senior most Director Health has been appointed/posted as Director General Health has no force. Held: In absence of statutory backing where seniority is not ordinarily ignored “practice” cannot be made a ground for posting against an office. Dr. Muhammad Rafique v. Azad Government & 3 others 2007 SCR 429 (A)
  10. Earlier selectee has to rank senior to the promotees irrespective of the ante-dated promotion. Asad Mahmood Malik  v. AJ&K Govt. & 4 others 2009 SCR 129 (H)
  11. Respondents promoted against temporary vacancies of direct recruits — Cannot be considered senior to appellant. Asad Mahmood Malik  v. AJ&K Govt. & 4 others 2009 SCR 129 (C)
  12. Respondents were promoted against temporarily available posts of direct quota — And promotion was on officiating basis — Held: Under law respondents even if had been promoted on officiating basis against the posts which fell vacant in 1997 or 2001 — They could not claim seniority vis-à-vis a direct selectee. Asad Mahmood Malik v. AJ&K Govt. & 4 others 2009 SCR 129 (D)
  13. The factum of seniority cannot be ignored in cases of promotion. Bashrat Hussain & 2 others v. Muhammad Imtiaz & 6 others 2009 SCR 530 (A)
  14. Police employees — the appellant has failed to challenge the promotion order as well as — selection list “F” within time before legal forum — contention that the name of appellant be entered in the seniority list just after the name of Saleem Durrani, Inspector.  Held: not tenable unless the orders of promotion of respondents and the order relating to entry in the promotion list ‘F’ are not set aside — further held: the appellant failed to challenge the promotion orders as well as the entry of respondent’s name in select list ‘f’ within time before legal forum.  Thus prayed relief becomes irrelevant. The orders for  entering the names of respondents in promotion list ‘F’ and their promotion orders without being challenged has attained finality therefore, as long as there orders are holding the field the same cannot be ignored while determining the inter-se seniority of the contestant civil servants.  Sardar Ghalib Hussain  v. I.G.P & 6 others 2014 SCR 239 (C)
  15. Bras band and pipe band — Two different cadres in the Police Department — both have their own independent seniority. There is no clear policy available regarding the seniority of these two different cadres. Bashir Hussain v. Superintendent of Police 2015 SCR 1449 (A)
  16. -see — 2017 SCR 718 ( A&B)
  17. –retrospective effect–when a civil servant—deprived of accrued/vested right—exception to normal principal—-normally the seniority is to be determined on the basis of date of continuous/actual appointment, however, it is now settled that where a civil servant has been deprived of his/her vested right; to redress his/her grievance and to protect his/her accrued right, the matter of seniority should be considered retrospectively. AJK Government  & 2 others v. Syeda Sabeen Gillani & others  2017 SCR 950 (B)
  18. —-seniority—determination of—in case of appointment by initial recruitment— by selection authority—in light of general order of merit—It is an admitted fact that without any fault on  part of the respondent, she was not appointed along with her batch fellows. In such state of affairs, the seniority of the respondent will be determined according to general order of merit assigned by the Public Service Commission from the date when her batch fellows were appointed as law is very much clear on the point that in case of persons appointed by initial recruitment, the seniority shall be determined in the light of general order of merit determined by the selection authority. AJK Government  & 2 others v. Syeda Sabeen Gillani & others  2017 SCR 950 (C)
  19. —from the date of regular promotion—and from the date of regular appointment—temporary appointment does not confer any right except pay protection—Under law, the seniority can be claimed by a civil servant in a grade from the date of regular promotion. The Anti-dated seniority cannot be given to a civil servant on the basis of an order of appointment which is temporary in nature cannot confer any right except pay protection. Musa Jan & others v. Arbab Shaheen & others 2017 SCR 1586 (A)  Syed Zulfiqar Ali Shah & 2 others vs. Qaisar Aurangzeb & 5 others, decided on 04-09-2008 rel.
  20. —-Promotion to  the post  of Civil Judge—from  the law graduate employees of administration of justice—Prior obtaining of requisite qualification does not create seniority— contention: that respondent acquired LLB decree prior to appellant, therefore, he was senior at the time of selection. Held: There is no provision in Rules that an incumbent by acquiring LLB degree prior in time shall become senior to the others. At the relevant time when the selection was made, under the rules, the appellant was eligible for promotion and he could not be considered junior to respondent No. 3 mere on the such flimsy ground that respondent No. 3 acquired the requisite degree of LLB prior to the appellant. Qadeer Hussain vs The Appointing Authority&others 2018 SCR 164 (C) 1989 SCR 278 & 1994 PLC (C.S) 887 rel
  21. —Seniority—inter-se —it is settled principle of law that when an employee is senior in lower grade to the other and both are promoted in the next higher grade then the employee who was senior in lower grade shall retain his seniority. Qadeer Hussain vs The Appointing Authority&others 2018 SCR 164 (D) 1996 SCR 171 rel
  22. —the relevant date for considering of seniority—date of regular appointment— Under law the seniority can only be determined from the date of regular appointment made either by initial recruitment, transfer or promotion. The appointments made otherwise cannot be considered as regular appointment and not relevant for determination of seniority. Shoukat Ali Mughal vs Secretary Service & others 2018 SCR 177 (B)
  23. —determination of seniority—two conditions; one is regular appointment and second is continuous service—There are only two conditions for determination of seniority, one is regular appointment to the grade or post and the other is continuous service. Shoukat Ali Mughal vs Secretary Service & others 2018 SCR 177 (C) 2013 SCR 889 rel
  24. —seniority—dismissal of appeal by the Service Tribunal— on ground that appellant not challenged proforma promotion of respondents—- the seniority is to be determined from date of regular appointment—ante-dated/proforma appointment is not regular appointment—retrospective effect given to the respondent—only for monetary benefits—not to affect seniority of other civil servants. The judgment of the Service Tribunal was set aside and the appellant was declared as regularly appointed by transfer on date of doing of the post i.e. 11.09.2000. Shoukat Ali Mughal vs Secretary Service & others 2018 SCR 177 (D)
  25.  —determination of—see Irfan Saleem & another v. Mir M. Abid & 12 others 2020 SCR 845 (c). —see Muhammad Ashraf & others v.  The Azad Govt. & others 2022 SCR 604 (A&B)
  26. —Seniority takes effect from the date of regular appointment to a post in a specific grade. Fahad Ibrar & another v. Azad Government & 4 others 2022 SCR 1163 (R)
error: Content is protected !!