Supreme Court restores seniority of West Bengal district judge placed below juniors for promotion

In a reprieve for an Additional District Judge from Kolkata, the Supreme Court, earlier this week, restored his claim of seniority. [Uttak Kumar Shaw vs Partha Sarathi Sen & Others].A division bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M M Sundresh also ordered the West Bengal government and the Calcutta High Court to give effect to the judge's claim of seniority within 12 weeks."The judgments rendered by the learned Single Judge and that of the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta stand set aside. The High Court and the State Government are directed to give effect to the impugned draft gradation list insofar as the appellant alone is concerned, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of the receipt of the copy of this judgment", the Court ordered..The top court issued the order on a plea moved by Judge Uttam Shaw from the Kolkata subordinate judiciary challenging the orders of the Calcutta High Court which turned down his claim of seniority. Shaw was appointed as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) in 1989 and was empanelled in the rank of West Bengal Higher Judicial Services by an order dated December 24, 2003. He was subsequently posted as a Fast Track court judge. In the meantime, a set of new rules namely - the West Bengal Judicial (Conditions of Service) Rules- were introduced in October, 2004. Counsel for the appellant submitted that from 2004 to 2008 several vacancies arose for the District Judge cadre but the High Court failed to fill in the same. However, in 2011, the High Court prepared a draft gradation list placing judicial officers from direct recruitment and those who had cleared competitive exams above the petitioner, even though he was senior to them. It was argued that the administration had failed to appreciate the fact that the petitioner was empanelled in higher judicial service rank in 2003, which is before the new rules were introduced in 2004 and thus, his seniority was compromised..Having heard the contentions, the Supreme Court did appreciate the move of the High Court to prepare the gradation list, which it said "is the fair acknowledgment on the part of the High Court to redeem its mistake committed in not promoting the officers at the appropriate time.""One cannot withhold the due promotion of the promotees till the date of recruitment of the direct recruits or appointment of the jump promotes. The consequence would obviously be disastrous," the bench said. .The bench further noted that that all the promotees were fitted in the vacancies that arose in between the year 2004 and 2008, while the petitioner was empanelled in 2003."This is notwithstanding the fact that a decision was taken way back in the year 2003 to promote as District Judges. In such view of the matter, the orders passed by the High Court may require interference," the bench added. The Bench however, clarified that it's order would only be applicable to the petitioner and not any other officer, who hasn't petitioned it. .Senior Advocate Jayant Nath, assisted by advocates Vivek Singh and Rahul Arya represented Shaw. The appeal was filed through advocate Bharti Tyagi. .[Read Order]