Chattisgarh High Court

Gouri Shankar Chourasiya vs High Court Of Chhattisgarh And Ors on 1 May, 2025

Author: Narendra Kumar Vyas

Bench: Narendra Kumar Vyas

                                                       1




                                                                        2025:CGHC:19791



                                                                                       AFR


                           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                            WPS No. 1332 of 2013
                                       Order Reserved on : 04.02.2025
                                       Order Delivered on : 01.05.2025


                    •    Gouri Shankar Chourasiya S/o Mulchand Chourasiya Aged About
                         43 Years Posted As Asstt Grade 1, High Court Establishment, R/o
                         Lig 182, Devrikhurd, Ps Torva, Distt Bilaspur, Cg, Chhattisgarh
                                                                               --- Petitioner

                                                    versus

                    1.   High Court Of Chhattisgarh And Ors S/o Through Registrar
                         General, Bodri, Distt Bilaspur, Cg, Chhattisgarh
                    2.   Registrar General High Court Of C.G., Bodri, Dist Bilaspur, Cg,
                         District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                    3.   Dev Sharan Dilliwar Presently Posted As Asst Grad 1, High Court
                         Establishment, Bodri, Ps Chakarabhata, Dist Bilaspur,c G, District :
                         Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                    4.   Sunil Kumar Verma Aged About 43 Years Presently Posted As Asst
                         Grad 1, High Court Establishment, Bodri, Ps Chakarabhata, Dist
                         Bilaspur,c G, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                    5.   Vivek Shrivastava Aged About 43 Years Presently Posted As Asst
                         Grad 1, High Court Establishment, Bodri, Ps Chakarabhata, Dist
                         Bilaspur,c G, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                    6.   Narottam Sahu Aged About 39 Years Presently Posted As Asst
                         Grad 1, High Court Establishment, Bodri, Ps Chakarabhata, Dist
                         Bilaspur,c G, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                                                                          --- Respondent(s)

Digitally signed by MANISH MANISH YADAV YADAV Date:

2025.05.01 15:22:57 +0530

• K.S. Angare S/o Late Derha Ram Angare Aged About 49 Years Qtr.

No. I-4/3, 27 Kholi, Vikas Nagar, Bilaspur, P.S. Civil Line District Bilaspur C.G. , Chhattisgarh

--- Petitioner

Versus

1. High Court Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. S/o Through Registrar General Village - Bodri Bilaspur C.G. , Chhattisgarh

2. Registrar General High Court Of C.G. Village Bodri, Distt. Bilapsur C.G., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Dev Sharan Dilliwar Aged About 45 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Sunil Kumar Verma Aged About 43 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

5. Pramod Kuar Pathak Aged About 41 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

6. Ram Kumar Sahu Aged About 44 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

7. Vivek Shrivastava Aged About 45 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

8. Narottam Sahu Aged About 39 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

9. Manoranjan Kumar Sinha Aged About 41 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

10. Mini Rajan D/o Aged About 41 Years Currently Working As Assistant Grade I, High Court Eastabilishment Village Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhatha Bilaspur C.G. , District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

--- Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vaibhav Shukla and Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocates

For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. R.S. Marhas with Mr. S.S. Marhas, and 2 Advocates

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas (CAV Order)

1. Since common question of law and facts are involved in both the

writ petitions, they are heard analogously and being disposed of by

this common order.

2. The petitioners have filed the present writ petitions under Article

226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the revised gradation

list for the year 2004 issued on 18.10.2012 and memo dated

08.02.2013 by which the petitioners' representation for grant of

seniority in the High Court establishment in the cadre of Assistant

Grade III with effect from date of joining in the district court

establishment 14.09.1990 and 09.01.1992 respectively. They have

also prayed for quashing of the criteria of passing of English /

Hindi typing for the purpose of seniority on the post of AG-III.

3. Brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioners are:-

A) The petitioner in WPS No. 1332/2013 was initially appointed

as Sales Ameen in the District Court Establishment on

14.09.1990 and the petitioner in WPS No. 1029/2013 was

initially appointed as Sales Ameen in the District Court

Establishment on 09.01.1992.

B) The record of the case would demonstrate that the then

Additional Registrar (A) vide its memo dated 17.01.2001 has

requested all the District Judges to send the information

regarding sending the employees on deputation to meet out

the acute shortage of employees. The note-sheet further

provides that due to repatriation of the employees of the High

Court, the High Court is facing acute shortage of manpower to

meet out the work and accordingly, willingness was sought and

respondents No. 2 to 4 submitted their willingness. It is

pertinent to mention here that at the time of deputation, the

petitioners were working as Sales Ameen but while taking

them on deputation they were posted as AG-III in the High

Court Establishment. The petitioners were taken on deputation

with the High Court wherein it has been clearly mentioned that

the essential qualification for appointment on the post is the

candidate should be graduate and Hindi and English typing

pass, but looking to the urgent nature of circumstances

Hon'ble the Chief Justice in exercise of power conferred under

Rule 21 of High Court Class III (Recruitment and Service)

Rules, 1966 has waived the condition and vide order dated

22.02.2001 the petitioners were deployed in the High Court on

deputation for a period of two years. The respondent High

Court on 06.11.2003, sought option for absorption in the High

Court from the petitioners.

C) Pursuant to the options submitted by the petitioners, their

services were absorbed in the establishment of respondent

High Court on the post of Assistant Grade-III vide order dated

28.04.2004 subject to condition that they will submit Hindi or

English Typing pass certificate and their seniority shall be

counted in the Establishment of the High Court with effect from

the date of their passing examination of Hindi or English

Typing.

D) After absorption of the petitioners, the High Court published a

provisional gradation list of Assistant Grade-III on 01.05.2004,

inviting objections from the employees. Some of the

employees finding that in the provisional list of Assistant

Grade-III, their names were shown below the employees who

were appointed in the establishment of High Court, they

immediately submitted their objections and prayed for fixation

of their seniority from the date of their joining in the

establishment of High Court and proper placement in the final

gradation list in the cadre of Assistant Grade-III. However, the

respondent High Court, ignoring the objections raised by those

employees and without making any correction regarding their

placement, published the final gradation list on 27.12.2004,

which was challenged by them by filling Writ Petition No.

3926/2005 (Dev Sharan Dilliwar & Others versus High Court of

Chhattisgarh & Others) before this Court. Relevant para of the

judgment is quoted below:

"20. On the basis of the aforesaid discussions, we hold the words ".. ..subject to the condition that he will be given seniority, from the date he has been holding the post on deputation or the date from which he has been appointed on a regular basis to the same or equivalent grade in his present department whichever is later" of

clause (c) of Rule 12(2) of the Rules of 1961 are liable to be struck being absurd and non-est in the eye of law and accordingly, the same are hereby struck down.

21. The respondent No.1 is to prepare a fresh gradation list of the Assistant Grade-III counting seniority of petitioners in accordance with the existing rules, that is to say, after excluding the part of clause (c) of the Rule 12 (2) which has been struck down by this order.

22. The petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs."

E) It has also been contended that in view of the order passed by

the Hon'ble Division Bench the State has amended the Rule

12 (2)(C) of the Chattisgarh Civil Services (General Condition

of Service) Rules, 1961 which reads as under:-

"12(2)(C) of the Rule, 1961 In the case of a person who is initially taken on deputation and absorbed later (i.e., where the relevant recruitment rules provide for "transfer on deputation/transfer") his seniority in the grade in which he is absorbed normally be counted from the date of absorption. If he has however been holding already (on the date da absorption) the same or equivalent grade on regular basis in his "parent department" (earlier it was present department), such regular service in the grade shall be taken into account in fixing his seniority, subject to the condition that he will be given seniority, from the date he has been holding the post on deputation or the date from which he has been appointed on a regular basis to the same or equivalent grade in his parent department "whichever is earlier" (earlier it was whichever is later)."

F) The High Court in view of order passed by the Hon'ble Division

Bench has revised the gradation list of AG-III and AG-II for the

year 2004-2005 which was published on 18.10.2012 and the

petitioners have been placed below the private respondents.

Being aggrieved with this gradation list placing them below

private respondents have preferred representation on

18.10.2012, 29.10.2012 and 12.10.2012 before the High Court

mainly contending that the petitioners were working in the

District Court Establishment since 1990/1992 and since 2001

they were working on deputation in High Court and

subsequently they have been absorbed in the High Court

Establishment on 28.04.2004, therefore, their seniority should

be counted from initial appointment whereas their seniority has

been counted from 07.02.2005 and 07.02.2006 respectively

after passing of the typing exam which is illegality and prayed

for correction in the gradation list. The same have been

rejected on 08.02.2013, which has been challenged in the writ

petitions and prayed for grant of seniority from the date of

initial appointment in view of the amendment in Rule 12(2)(C)

of the General Condition Rules.

4. The High Court has filed their return denying the allegation mainly

contending that the respondents in compliance of the order has

corrected the gradation list and the past services of the petitioners

have also been considered for absorbing them but since essential

qualification for appointment of AG-III as per the Chhattisgarh High

Court Establishment (Appointment and Condition of Service) Rule,

2003 is graduate and knowledge of Hindi and English typing with

proof and one year Diploma Courses from ITI or any equivalent

board/university, as such, the petitioners have been granted

seniority from the date they are having requisite qualification for

appointment, therefore, there is no illegality on the part of the

respondents. It has been further submitted that the petitioner Gouri

Shankar has never challenged the order 29.09.2005 by which he

has been absorbed with effect from the date he has passed the

typing examination on 07.02.2005. Similarly, the petitioner Kunwar

Singh Angare has never challenged the same order by which the

period of deputation has been extended for one year till

03.02.2006. As such, the subsequent rejection of representation

does not give any right to the petitioners to file the present

petitions after lapse of 8 years. Thus, it has been prayed for

dismissal of both the writ petitions.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that since the

petitioners were initially appointed in the District Court

Establishment and they have been absorbed with the High Court,

therefore, as per Rule 12(2)(C) they should be granted seniority

from the date they were sent on deputation, as such, the

respondents have committed illegality in not grating seniority to

them from their initial appointment. It has also been submitted by

the learned counsel for the petitioners that the post of process

writer / sale Ameen are class-III post as per the order issued by

High Court of Madhya Pradesh on 11.07.1975 and 28.06.1996 and

as per the M.P. Revision of Pay Rule, 1996. The pay scale of post

of Sale Ameen / Process Writer and AG-III are one and same i.e.

in the pay scale of 3050-75-3950-80-4590. Therefore, it has been

contended the petitioners before deputation from their initial

appointment are getting the pay scale of AG-III, as such also their

services should be counted for the purpose of seniority. It has

been further contended that Hon'ble the Chief Justice of High

Court of Madhya Pradesh has empowered to relax from the

operation of any rule made under the Madhya Pradesh Officers

and Employees Recruitment and Condition of Service

(Classification, Control, Appeal and Conduct) Rules, 1998

accordingly the Hon'ble Chief Justice has granted relaxation for

enforcing the minimum qualification for a district recruitment in

case of promotees and ordered that the order dated 28.08.1971

issued by the GAD cannot be made applicable to the Sale Ameen

and Process Writer who are promoted as Lower Division Clerk,

Thus, they would submit that relation from typing certificate should

be granted for absorption also and would pray for allowing the writ

petitions. To substantiate their submission the petitioners have

referred to the judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in

Writ Petition No. 3926/2005 (Dev Sharan Dilliwar & Others versus

High Court of Chhattisgarh & Others) and judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in case of S.I. Rampal vs. Lt. Governor through

Chief Secretary {2000 (1) SCC 644}. It has also been contended

that the executive instruction cannot override the statutory

provisions, as the condition mentioned in the order dated

29.04.2005 cannot replace the Rule 12(2)(C) and would refer to

the judgment in case of K. Karuppaswami and Others vs. State

of Tamil Nadu {1998 (8) SCC 475} and Union of India and

Others vs. Soma Sundaram Vishwanath and Others {1989 (1)

SCC 175} and would pray for allowing the petitions.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the High Court reiterating

the submission would submit that the petitioners were not having

the requisite qualification prescribed under the Rules, 2003

whereas the private respondents are having requisite qualification

therefore, they have been given seniority from the date of their

initial appointment in compliance of the Rule 12(2)(C) and no

discrimination and arbitrariness has been done. It has been further

contended that from bare perusal of the additional documents filed

by the High Court it is quite vivid that Dev Sharan Dilliwar has

cleared typing in the year Feb, 1990, Sunil Kumar Verma has

passed typing on 15.04.1996, Vivek Shrivastava has passed

typing on 31.01.1988, Narottam Kumar Sahu has cleared the

typing examination in Nov, 2001, Ram Kumar Sahu has cleared

typing examination on 24.04.1988, Mini Rajan has cleared typing

examination on 13.09.1989, thus, all the candidates were having

requisite qualification of typing pass at the time of absorption as

such, the petitioners cannot claim parity with other respondents

and would pray for dismissal of the writ petitions.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

8. From the submission made by the parties, the points emerged for

determination by this Court are

I. Whether the absorption of the petitioners from the date of

passing of the typing examination is against the Rule 12(2)(C)

of the General Condition Rules, 1961?

II. Whether the non-challenging the order dated 28.04.2004 by

which the petitioners have been granted seniority from the date

of passing of the typing examination and extension of

deputation period of one of the petitioners suffer from delay and

latches are fatal and subsequent challenge of rejection of

representation can condone the delay of 8 years in preferring

the petition?

Discussion and finding on Point No. I

9. The counsel for the petitioners have vehemently submitted that the

High Court of Madhya Pradesh and the State of Madhy Pradesh

issued memo dated 13.11.1980 (Annexure P/6) and 27.01.1983

(Annexure P/7) for exemption from passing of typing examination to

the Sales Ameen for promotion on the post of Lower Division Clerk

as such, the petitioners should have been granted seniority from

their initial appointment from 1990/1992 is being considered. The

memo dated 13.11.1980 reads as under :-

"(I) Posts of lower division clerks, which do not require typing

knowledge, if and when fall vacant, may be filled in by promoting

non-qualified process writers / Sales- Amins according to their merit

tampered by seniority;

(ii) For posts of copists and typists, process writers / Sales-Amins

who possess requisite educational and typing examination

certificates may be allowed to compete with others and those

candidates called from employment exchange taking into

consideration their work and conduct in their present jobs. In case

of selection on merit, such process writers, clerks irrespective of

their position in the seniority in the lower scale of pay;

(iii) These instructions would not debar promotion of qualified

process writers/ Sales-Amins even to posts which do not require

typing qualifications in case no suitable senior persons as

mentioned in clause (I) above are available for promotion.

10. From the above mentioned circulars, it is quite vivid that the

circulars deal with the promotion of Sales Amin on the post of

Lower Division Clerk, if the exigencies as set out in the circular

(Annexure P/6) are available. The circular further provides that in

case candidates for promotion are not available then only relaxation

can be considered for promotion. Similarly, the circular of 1983

deals with the grant of exemption from typing examination to the

Lower Division Clerk who have completed 40 years while absorbing

them or when they directly recruited. Thus, the circulars referred by

the petitioners are not applicable to the present facts of the case.

Even otherwise, in the present case the petitioners were initially

working as Sales Amin in the District Court establishment and they

have been taken on deputation grating relaxation to them. The High

Court of Chhattisgarh Officers and Employees Recruitment and

Conditions of Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1996

(for short "the Rules, 1996") provides qualification for appointment

on the post of AG-III by direct recruitment through competitive

examination as may be prescribed by the Appointing Authority or by

deputation of qualified personnel from the Establishment of District

and Sessions Judges in the State to such extent as may be

determined by the Chief Justice from time to time. The qualification

has been prescribed in Schedule 9 of the Rules which reads as

under :-

"(a) Must be graduate from any recognised university

(b) Must have passed Typewriting Examination in English and Hindi languages from any recognised Board of Shorthand and Typewriting Examination & knowledge of computer application.

11. From the bare perusal of the rules, it is quite vivid that the typing

examination was essential qualification for appointment for the post

of AG-III which essentially the petitioners were not possessing. The

High Court taking lenient view has allowed them to continue on

deputation subject to condition of passing typing examination

before expiration of deputation period vide order dated 29.04.2004

and as soon they have cleared the typing examination and fulfilled

the eligibility criteria for appointment they have been granted

seniority. Thus, the action of the respondent in granting seniority

from the date of passing of the typing examination and imposing

condition for passing the typing examination which is essential

qualification for appointment and cannot be relaxed or waived, has

granted the seniority cannot be found faulty. The Hon'ble Supreme

Court in case of Jomon K.K. vs. Shajimon P. and Others {2025

INSC 425} has considered the delay in challenging the adverse

order in service law and prevailing of essential qualification for

appointment and has held as under :-

"19. Though there can be little quarrel with the law laid down in Ranjan Kumar (supra) and Kulwant Singh (supra) and considering what has been argued by Mr. Ravindran as a proposition of law, noted above, to be correct, what stands out is that the appellant did not immediately challenge the Tribunal's order and rested on his oars to throw a challenge till his service came to be terminated. In fact, he took a chance of favourable consideration of his case by responding to the show cause. Having taken a chance and not being successful,he cannot, thereafter, succeed before us on the ground of his non-joinder as a necessary party. Having not initiated appropriate legal action that the law

permitted him to take, he can get back his service only if the primary contention raised by Mr. Ravindran succeeds.

25. We have further seen from the letter of the Director dated 9thOctober, 2010 addressed to KPSC that it was not voluntary; rather,it was at the behest of candidates who did not possess current Lascar's licence. It can well be presumed that the Director buckled under pressure. However, notwithstanding that, qualifications statutorily laid down could not have been diluted by what the Director felt should be considered by KPSC and, therefore, it is the statutorily prescribed qualifications that should prevail."

12. Since the petitioners were not having the essential qualification for

appointment for the post of AG-III therefore, they cannot claim

benefits of seniority after absorption invoking Rule 12(2)(C) of the

Rules of 1961 as the Rules clearly provide that the candidate who

is holding same or equivalent grade on regular basis in his parent

department on absorption is entitled to get seniority from the period

he was on deputation. As such, the impugned orders do not suffer

from any illegality or irregularity which warrants any interference by

this Court.

13. The writ petitions being devoid of merit deserve to be dismissed and

accordingly, they are dismissed. No order as to costs.

Sd/-