Past service and seniority on absorption depend on statutory rules or accepted conditions, not an automatic constitutional right.

Deputed employees of U.P. Jal Nigam who opted for absorption in the Development Authority Centralised Service could not claim past service in the parent body for seniority because the governing scheme allowed absorption only on the stated terms and did not confer a statutory right to count that service. The State could prescribe conditions for absorption, and employees who accepted those terms could not later challenge the resulting seniority position under Articles 14 and 16. The text also notes that inter se seniority affecting absent appointees should not be decided in their absence, so impleadment of affected employees was necessary before granting such relief.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether deputed employees of U.P. Jal Nigam, on opting for absorption in the Development Authority Centralised Service, were entitled to count past service in the parent organisation for seniority; (ii) Whether the conditions attached to absorption and the consequent fixation of seniority were arbitrary or violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; (iii) Whether the High Court could grant such relief on a writ petition without the affected appointees being impleaded.

Issue (i): Whether deputed employees of U.P. Jal Nigam, on opting for absorption in the Development Authority Centralised Service, were entitled to count past service in the parent organisation for seniority.

Analysis: The statutory scheme governed recruitment, absorption and seniority in the Centralised Service. Section 5-A of the parent Act contemplated absorption only of persons serving in development authorities, while U.P. Jal Nigam was an autonomous body and not a development authority. The appellants were not recruited under any rule providing transfer or absorption as a matter of right. Rule 7 applied only to persons finally absorbed under Section 5-A(2), whereas the respondents had entered service only on the basis of an offer made by the State in exercise of residuary power and had accepted the stated conditions. Their past service in Jal Nigam therefore could not be treated as a matter of statutory entitlement for seniority.

Conclusion: The respondents were not entitled to count their Jal Nigam service for seniority, and the High Court's contrary view was ; the issue was decided in favour of the appellants.

Issue (ii): Whether the conditions attached to absorption and the consequent fixation of seniority were arbitrary or violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The State was competent to prescribe terms while offering absorption. The respondents had an option to accept or the offer, and they accepted it without protest. Once they opted for absorption on stated terms, they could not later repudiate the very conditions forming the basis of their entry. Seniority is not a fundamental right, and past service can be counted only where the governing rules or a special legal situation so permit. The precedents relied upon by the High Court related to different statutory settings involving express rules or different recruitment schemes and were inapplicable here.

Conclusion: The conditions of absorption and the resultant seniority position were not unconstitutional, and no violation of Articles 14 or 16 was made out; this issue was decided in favour of the appellants.

Issue (iii): Whether the High Court could grant such relief on a writ petition without the affected appointees being impleaded.

Analysis: The relief claimed affected inter se seniority of persons who were not parties before the High Court. Determination of seniority rights of absent affected employees could not properly be made in their absence.

Conclusion: The High Court ought not to have decided inter se seniority without impleading the affected appointees; this issue also supported the appellants.

Final Conclusion: The common judgment of the High Court was unsustainable and was set aside. The appeals were allowed, and the respondents' claim to count Jal Nigam service for seniority was rejected, leaving any challenge to the later notification open independently.

Ratio Decidendi: Past service of a deputed employee can be counted for seniority only when the governing statutory rules or a legally recognised special situation so provide; where absorption is accepted on express conditions under a discretionary State offer, the employee is bound by those conditions and cannot later invoke Articles 14 and 16 to claim a higher seniority as of right.

---