| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | V. Vincent Velankanni vs. Union of India & Others |
| Introduction | The case states a dispute regarding the seniority of employees in the Engine Factory, Avadi, Chennai, based on their promotion from semi-skilled to skilled grades. The appellant challenged the draft seniority list, which placed him below others. |
| Factual Background | The appellant was appointed as a semi-skilled Fitter in 1996, and after completing an extended probation period, he was promoted to the skilled grade in 1999. A seniority list issued in 2006 placed him below employees with similar appointments. |
| Legal Issues |
|
| Applicable Law |
|
| Analysis | The appellant argued for seniority based on the merit of the initial appointment. The court, however, emphasized that as per existing rules, seniority was based on promotion to the skilled grade after completing probation and passing trade tests. |
| Conclusion | The appeal was dismissed. The seniority list would remain as per the promotion to skilled grades. The GO dated 2015 was held not to apply retrospectively, and the appellant’s claim of seniority based on initial appointment was rejected. |
| Current Scenario | The seniority dispute was resolved with the appellant losing the case. The court upheld the existing seniority list that placed the appellant below others who had been promoted earlier. |
CASE SUMAMRY – In this case, there is a seniority dispute with V. Vincent Velankanni, who was appointed as a semi-skilled Fitter in 1996. After completing his probation and being promoted to the skilled grade in 1999, a draft seniority list issued in 2006 placed him below other employees. He challenged the seniority order, arguing that his seniority should be determined from the date of his initial appointment. The court dismissed the appeal, holding that seniority should be based on the date of promotion to the skilled grade, not the initial appointment, and the appellant’s extended probation period affected his seniority status.
“Once an incumbent is appointed to a post according to rules, his seniority must be counted from the date of his appointment and not according to the date of his confirmation.” – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
READ ALSO – JUDICIAL REVIEW ON SEALED COVER PROCEDURE AND PROMOTION IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE
