https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192428 Seniority between direct recruits and promotee Deputy Engineers was held to depend on constitutional equality where both groups belonged to one integrated Class II cadre and performed the same duties. A rule that made seniority turn on confirmation, rather than on continuous officiation in a non-fortuitous vacancy, was found to lack a rational nexus with administrative efficiency and was struck down as discriminatory. The Court also clarified that the 1963 Maharashtra resolution did not supersede the 1960 rules, the 1965 Gujarat notification did not convert those rules into statutory rules, and there was no breach of the Bombay State Reorganisation Act proviso. Continuous officiation was thus recognised for seniority purposes. en-us Wed, 04 May 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 May 2017 17:31:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192428 Seniority between direct recruits and promotee Deputy Engineers was held to depend on constitutional equality where both groups belonged to one integrated Class II cadre and performed the same duties. A rule that made seniority turn on confirmation, rather than on continuous officiation in a non-fortuitous vacancy, was found to lack a rational nexus with administrative efficiency and was struck down as discriminatory. The Court also clarified that the 1963 Maharashtra resolution did not supersede the 1960 rules, the 1965 Gujarat notification did not convert those rules into statutory rules, and there was no breach of the Bombay State Reorganisation Act proviso. Continuous officiation was thus recognised for seniority purposes. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 04 May 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192428