https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302953 Post-based roster rules governing higher judicial service were held to control both appointment sequence and inter se seniority. Promotees appointed under Rule 7(3)(a) were not treated as beyond quota or as ad hoc merely because the cadre strength was later recalculated, since the recruitment exercise had been completed within the revised scheme. The Court also held that Rule 7(4) read with Appendix-B required seniority to be fixed on a roster basis, not solely by date of joining or length of service. The seniority list therefore had to be recast in accordance with the roster, while the promotees' appointments remained valid within quota. en-us Wed, 03 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Jun 2022 09:18:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302953 Post-based roster rules governing higher judicial service were held to control both appointment sequence and inter se seniority. Promotees appointed under Rule 7(3)(a) were not treated as beyond quota or as ad hoc merely because the cadre strength was later recalculated, since the recruitment exercise had been completed within the revised scheme. The Court also held that Rule 7(4) read with Appendix-B required seniority to be fixed on a roster basis, not solely by date of joining or length of service. The seniority list therefore had to be recast in accordance with the roster, while the promotees' appointments remained valid within quota. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302953