In Brief
This appeal concerned the seniority of Assistant Consolidation Officers (ACOs) in Uttar Pradesh appointed through different sources in 1997-98. Promotees claimed they should rank above direct recruits appointed earlier in the same recruitment year under the cyclic rota system mandated by the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Consolidation Service Rules, 1992. The Court held that Rules 18 and 19 require a combined seniority list with cyclic ordering when both sources are appointed in the same recruitment year, with promotees taking the first position. The 2005 seniority list granting higher rank to direct recruits violated these mandatory rules. The appeals were dismissed, upholding the High Court's decision.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.