Seniority of promotees counts from officiating promotion date where appointment is within quota and later approved.

A promotee appointed on ad hoc promotion within the prescribed quota, and later approved by the Commission, was entitled to count officiating service from the date of that promotion for seniority as Assistant Engineer. The service rules required recruitment through the prescribed quota and selection process, and the seniority note treated an appointment order with an earlier specified date as the date of substantive appointment. Because the appellants were qualified, promoted within quota, selected through the departmental process, and later approved with reference to the same promotion year, their seniority properly ran from the officiating promotion date. Earlier authorities were distinguished as involving direct recruits, irregular appointments, or excess promotions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants, appointed on ad hoc promotion within the promotional quota and later approved by the Commission, were entitled to count their officiating service from the date of such promotion for seniority as Assistant Engineers.

Analysis: The applicable service rules prescribed recruitment to the post from both direct recruitment and promotion, fixed the quota for promotees, and required selection and recommendation through the prescribed process. The seniority rule and its note indicated that where an appointment order specified a back date, that date would be treated as the date of substantive appointment. On the admitted facts, the appellants were duly qualified, promoted within the reserved quota, selected by the departmental promotion process, and later approved by the Commission with reference to the same year of promotion. The earlier decisions relied on by the parties were distinguished on the ground that they either involved direct recruits, appointments dehors the rules, excess promotions, or cases where the ad hoc service could not be counted because the appointment itself was irregular. On the proper construction of the rules, the seniority list prepared on the basis of the officiating promotion and later approval was consistent with the governing rules.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to seniority from the date of their officiating promotion as Assistant Engineers, and not merely from the later date of Commission approval; the seniority list could not be interfered with on the ground urged.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a promotee is appointed within the prescribed quota in accordance with the recruitment rules and the appointment is later regularised or approved with effect from the earlier date, seniority follows that substantive date and the officiating service is countable.

---