Merit-based seniority for direct recruits prevails over roster points and date of joining where rules do not provide otherwise.

Where recruitment rules and settled practice make merit the basis of selection, and no statutory seniority rule provides otherwise, inter se seniority of direct recruits must ordinarily follow the merit ranking in the select list. Roster points govern reservation in appointment, not seniority among candidates selected from the same examination, and a fortuitous date of joining cannot displace merit-based seniority. The Court also noted that candidates unjustly denied timely appointment and later appointed pursuant to judicial directions should not lose seniority for no fault of theirs, and that a long-settled seniority position should not be unsettled after many years. The merit-based seniority list was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether inter se seniority of direct recruits to the Haryana Judicial Service was to be determined on the basis of merit in the select list or on the basis of roster points and actual date of joining.

Analysis: The Rules governing recruitment emphasised merit in preparation of the select list and selection for appointment in the order of merit. In the absence of any statutory seniority rule, a long-standing High Court practice had developed seniority on the basis of merit, and the State instructions also indicated that reserved vacancies were not intended to fix inter se seniority by roster points. The Court distinguished the cases dealing with promotion or quota-based seniority and held that roster points govern reservation in appointment, not seniority among direct recruits selected from the same examination. It also noted that the candidates concerned had been unjustly denied timely appointment and were later appointed pursuant to judicial directions, so they could not be made to lose seniority for no fault of theirs. The Court further observed that a settled seniority position should not be unsettled after many years.

Conclusion: Inter se seniority was to be determined according to merit in the select list, not by the date of joining or roster points, and the challenge to the seniority list failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected and the seniority determined on the basis of merit was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where recruitment rules and established practice make merit the basis of selection, and no statutory rule provides otherwise, inter se seniority of direct recruits must ordinarily follow the merit ranking in the select list and cannot be fixed by roster points or fortuitous date of joining.

---