1996 (7) TMI 606 - SC - Indian Laws

Statutory Pay Scale Revision Determines Seniority for Promotion Under Article 309

The SC allowed the appeal, holding that the appellants, whose pay scale was raised by statutory rules to a higher level than the respondents, could not be ... - ISSUES: Whether the respondents, initially appointed as Accountants with a higher pay scale, are entitled to seniority and promotion over appellants who were Head Clerks with initially lower pay scales but subsequently received higher pay scales and statutory recognition.Whether statutory rules made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, which revised pay scales and promotional eligibility, override earlier executive instructions regarding seniority and promotion.Whether Accountants are eligible for promotion to the post of Gazetted Class II under the statutory rules enacted. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The court held that the appellants' case is 'founded on a sounder footing' because the statutory rules increased their pay scale beyond that of the respondents, who remained on a comparatively lower scale; thus, respondents cannot claim seniority or promotion over appellants.The court ruled that 'executive instructions issued earlier had to yield place to the statutory rules made under proviso to Article 309,' thereby giving precedence to statutory rules over prior executive orders concerning seniority and promotion.The court concluded that the statutory rules 'do not include Accountants as a feeder post for promotion as Gazetted Class II,' and therefore respondents are not entitled to promotion to those posts.The Tribunal's direction to consider respondents senior to appellants and to grant them promotion was held to be 'in clear error' and was set aside. RATIONALE: The legal framework applied includes statutory rules enacted under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, which empowered the Government to regulate recruitment and conditions of service for public servants.The court emphasized the primacy of statutory rules over executive orders or instructions, especially when such rules alter pay scales and eligibility for promotion.The court analyzed the pay scale revisions and promotional avenues created by the Government, noting that the appellants' pay scales were increased to Rs. 620-1200 while respondents remained at Rs. 570-1080, reflecting a substantive difference in status and eligibility.The interpretation adopted reflects a doctrinal adherence to the principle that statutory provisions governing service conditions prevail over inconsistent executive instructions.