T he conferment of seniority would be against the Recruitment Year in which the recruitment process is initiated for filling up of the vacancies,

2);you can file petition before CAT if you are being denied seniority contrary to OM of year 2014

3) you had made representation against being denied seniority but was wrongly rejected by the department

If CAT refuses to grant you any reliefs you can challenge said order before the HC

Since the OM of 2014 is not applicable retrospectively, you can't rely upon it to seek seniority w.e.f. the vacancy year, i.e., 1999.

That's because this OM specifically states that cases settled prior to coming into effect of this OM can't be reopened on it's basis.

Having said that, if you are sporty and willing to take a chance, you are free to move a representation in this matter and seek the benefit of reckoning your seniority w.e.f. 1999

Hello,

You may approach the High Court challenging such bar which makes a prohibition that cases settled prior to issue of this OM may not to be reopened.

CAT in this case will not be of much help to you as a government order can not be turned down by them. You may take a chance by approaching the HC directly under art 226 of the Constitution of India.

Regards

1. the Memo says that the cases settled prior to issue of this OM 'may not be reopened' and not 'shall not be reopened'.

2. So, it is clear that you can approach the appropriate tribunal for reopening your case based on the Supreme Court judgment (2012) / DoPT OM dt 2014 to seek justice.

1. You shall have to file the case before the CAT first.

2. On receipt of the adverse judgement, if any, you shall have to approach the High Court and the Supreme Court, if need compels.

Dear Sir,

You are correct. Only High Court and Supreme court can overrule DoPT as such you may try for getting promotion and I will search for relevent judgment which are in your favor.

Kindly advise whether I can seek justice based on Supreme Court judgment (2012) / DoPT OM dt 2014 and reopen my case (of year 2006) seeking remedy on the basis of natural justice or whatever is applicable in such cases.

Clarification of the term “availability” O.M. No.20011/1/2006-Estt.(D) Dated 03.03.2008:>

It is clarified that

while the inter-se seniority of direct recruits and promotees is to be fixed on the

basis of the rotation of quotas of vacancies, the year of availability, both in the

case of direct recruits as well as the promotees, for the purpose of rotation and

fixation of seniority, shall be the actual year of appointment after declaration of

results/selection and completion of pre-appointment formalities as prescribed. It is

further clarified that when appointments against unfilled vacancies are made in

subsequent year or years either by direct recruitment or promotion, the persons so

appointed shall not get seniority of any earlier year (viz. year of vacancy/panel or

year in which recruitment process is initiated) but get the seniority of the year in

which they are appointed on substantive basis. The year of availability will be the

vacancy year in which a candidate of the particular batch of selected direct recruits

or an officer of the particular batch of promotees joins the post/service.

Cases of seniority already decided (prior to issue of this O.M. dated

3.3.2008), with reference to any other interpretation of the term `available’ as

contained in O.M. dated 3.7.1986 need not be reopened.

Note The seniority of direct recruits and promotees is delinked from the

vacancy/year of vacancy. The seniority / inter se seniority of direct recruits and

promotees in a particular year is fixed with reference to the availability of the

candidates /officers after completion of all pre-appointment formalities and

rotation of quota is applicable only among the available direct recruits and

promotees. (O.M. No. 22011/7/86-Esst.D Dated 03.07.1986)

You may note the OM is not ambiguous however, if you feel aggrieved, you still can approach CAT based on the supreme judgment in this regard.

Please intimate whether CAT will entertain my petition in contrary to the seemingly/ apparent bar on reopening of cases prior to 2014. I personally feel they will give judgment based on existing rules. As experienced earlier only High Courts/ Supreme Court can give favourable judgment / overrule such DoPT time bars.

CAT will accept your application and it may hear both the sides for its maintainability.

You can interpret the law and the provisions of the referred OM in the manner which you understand and present your arguments based on the supreme court judgment, let the tribunal pass any order, which can be challenged in the appeal.

If the said judgement is in your favour and speaks about retrospective effect then you can avail the benefit of the same. But it's slightly difficult but not impossible that supreme court will entertain your greivance.