https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302953 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision that promotions under Rule 7(3)(a) were within quota and not ad hoc, rejecting the placement of officers at the bottom of the seniority list. It emphasized the use of a roster system for appointments and determining seniority for all streams, including Fast Track Judges absorbed into the regular cadre. The Court set aside the seniority list, directing a recasting based on the roster system, finalizing a new list to prevent delays and aligning officers from all streams according to the roster. Each party was instructed to bear their own costs. 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 The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision that promotions under Rule 7(3)(a) were within quota and not ad hoc, rejecting the placement of officers at the bottom of the seniority list. It emphasized the use of a roster system for appointments and determining seniority for all streams, including Fast Track Judges absorbed into the regular cadre. The Court set aside the seniority list, directing a recasting based on the roster system, finalizing a new list to prevent delays and aligning officers from all streams according to the roster. Each party was instructed to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302953