https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304092 SC ruled on inter-se seniority determination for Delhi Higher Judicial Service officers, addressing promotees versus direct recruitments under quota and rota principles. The court clarified distinctions between ad hoc, stop-gap, and fortuitous appointments, holding that appointments made with proper qualifications, authority approval, and continued for substantial periods cannot be classified as temporary arrangements. HC's classification of promotee appointments as fortuitous/ad hoc/stop-gap was deemed erroneous. SC quashed existing seniority lists and directed re-determination based on continuous service length, requiring HC to finalize new seniority within six weeks. en-us Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Feb 2025 15:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304092 SC ruled on inter-se seniority determination for Delhi Higher Judicial Service officers, addressing promotees versus direct recruitments under quota and rota principles. The court clarified distinctions between ad hoc, stop-gap, and fortuitous appointments, holding that appointments made with proper qualifications, authority approval, and continued for substantial periods cannot be classified as temporary arrangements. HC's classification of promotee appointments as fortuitous/ad hoc/stop-gap was deemed erroneous. SC quashed existing seniority lists and directed re-determination based on continuous service length, requiring HC to finalize new seniority within six weeks. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304092