In Brief
Rama Negi sought promotion to Office Superintendent in a Cantonment Board over a junior colleague with disciplinary issues. The key dispute concerned whether seniority in the feeder cadre should be determined by appointment date or higher pay scale. The Supreme Court held that under the applicable 1988 Office Memorandum, higher pay scale determines seniority among similarly graded candidates. For selection posts requiring seniority-cum-merit, a candidate's entire service record—including pending or completed disciplinary proceedings—must be considered as a fitness marker. The High Court's error in citing a 1985 (not 1988) memorandum and disregarding the appellant's unblemished record versus the respondent's penalties led to its reversal. Promotion favoring the appellant was upheld.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.