Civil List as seniority list: court treated long-standing departmental practice as controlling and lifted the bar on DPC implementation.

A long-used departmental Civil List, showing grade-wise placement, serial numbers and service particulars, was treated as the operative seniority list because it had functioned for decades as the working basis for promotions; the prefatory disclaimer was viewed only as a verification caution, not a denial of seniority status. The Tribunal's direction to prepare a fresh seniority list and withhold DPC recommendations was set aside because the referred question on whether relaxation of the quota rule affected the rota rule had to be decided first, and there was no sufficient basis to stall otherwise eligible promotions.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Civil List maintained by the department was a seniority list for the officers of the service. (ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in directing preparation of a fresh seniority list and in restraining implementation of the DPC recommendations without first deciding the reference on the effect of relaxation of the quota rule on the rota rule.

Issue (i): Whether the Civil List maintained by the department was a seniority list for the officers of the service.

Analysis: The Court held that the Civil List had been used for decades as the working seniority list, contained grade-wise placement, serial numbers and service particulars, and was employed for promotion decisions. The disclaimer in the preface was treated as a cautionary statement for verification and correction, not as a negation of its seniority function. The absence of a separately produced formal seniority list did not displace the established administrative practice reflected in the Civil List.

Conclusion: The Civil List was held to be the seniority list.

Issue (ii): Whether the Tribunal was justified in directing preparation of a fresh seniority list and in restraining implementation of the DPC recommendations without first deciding the reference on the effect of relaxation of the quota rule on the rota rule.

Analysis: The Court held that the reference made to the Tribunal required a decision on whether relaxation of the quota rule also affected the rota rule and on the correctness of the conflicting views in the earlier Tribunal decisions. Without resolving that reference, directing a fresh seniority list would be futile because either approach would generate fresh challenge. The Court also found no adequate basis to keep the DPC results in abeyance, particularly when the candidates recommended were otherwise eligible and vacancies remained available.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's directions to prepare a fresh seniority list and to withhold implementation of the DPC recommendations were set aside.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were allowed, the Tribunal's order was set aside, the Civil List was treated as the operative seniority list, the DPC recommendations were permitted to be implemented subject to the Tribunal's decision on the pending reference, and the Tribunal was directed to decide that reference expeditiously.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a department has consistently operated a Civil List as the working seniority list and it contains the incidents of seniority, the list may be treated as the seniority list unless displaced by law; and a tribunal should first answer a referred legal question essential to seniority determination before directing a fresh list or stalling consequential promotions.

---