HC resolves decades-old dispute: Seniority of transferred employees to be determined by 1996 ranks

Putting an end to decades-old controversy, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that the employees moved from the Chandigarh Administration to the Municipal Corporation will keep their original seniority as on May 1996. This means their rank in the parent department at that time will decide their seniority in Municipal Corporation Chandigarh (MCC).

The division bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Lapita Banerji also set aside the single bench ruling, which had directed that the seniority of employees already transferred to MCC should not be adversely affected by subsequent movement from the administration to the corporation.

The bench was hearing an appeal filed in the matter by the Union Territory of Chandigarh and other appellants through senior advocate Amit Jhanji with counsel Abhishek K Premi. The court ruled that the seniority of employees who exercised their option for transfer later could not be disregarded. It noted that 18 respondent-employees, who joined corporation subsequently, were senior to four other respondent-employees in the Chandigarh Administration before their transfer.

“It is not a case where the four respondents had responded to the call of the nation to serve on the border. They had only opted earlier than the 18 respondents to be transferred to the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh,” the bench observed, emphasising that mere early transfer did not confer seniority.

Tracing the history of the dispute, the court noted that in 1996, the Chandigarh Administration had sought options from employees for their transfer to MCC following a government notification. Some employees challenged the process before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), arguing that they were not given adequate time to exercise their option. The tribunal, in 2001, directed fresh opportunities for all employees to opt for transfer. This ruling was upheld by the high court in 2002.

In compliance with the directions, the Chandigarh Administration issued fresh notifications in 2005 and 2006, inviting options from employees for transfer. Several employees, including the 18 respondents exercised this option and were transferred accordingly. However, this led to another round of litigation as the four employees transferred earlier claimed their seniority was being adversely affected.

The high court rejected this contention, holding that the tribunal’s directions had attained finality and were binding. “We do not find any illegality in the action of the Chandigarh Administration in transferring the 18 respondents for the reason that the action of the Chandigarh Administration was in consonance with the directions of the tribunal,” the bench ruled, adding that the previous challenge to the absorption process had already been dismissed.

The court also dismissed the argument that the four respondents should be treated as senior merely because they had become permanent cadre employees of the corporation in 1996. “There is no vested right in their favour to claim seniority over and above the 18 respondents as there is no dispute that respondents they were senior to the four respondents in the Chandigarh Administration,” the bench clarified.

As a result, the court set aside the single bench judgment to the extent that it protected the seniority of employees who were transferred earlier. “The seniority would be determined as per the seniority in the Chandigarh Administration as on May 1996,” the court concluded, making it clear that the action of the Chandigarh Administration was neither illegal nor arbitrary.