AIR 1990 SUPREME COURT 1176 ::1990 LAB. I. C. 942 ::1990 UJ(SC) 2 23 ::(1990) 1 CurLR 506 ::(1990) 60 FacLR 494 ::1990 SCC (L&S) 380 ::(1990) 2 LabLJ 1 ::1990 (2) SCC 653 ::1990 All CJ 603 ::(1990) 1 Lab LN 776 ::(1990) 13 ATC 702 ::(1990) 1 CurLJ(CCR) 545 ::(1990) 2 ServLR 32 ::(1990) 1 JT 286 (SC) ::1990 (1) JT 286

Supreme Court Of India

(From : 1980 (2) Serv LR 593 (Punj and Har)

Hon'ble Judge(s): Ranganath Misra, M. M. Punchhi, K. Ramaswamy , JJJ

Constitution of India , Art.14, Art.16, Art.309— read with Punjab Subordinate Agricultural Service Rules (1933) , R.7, R.10— Common seniority - State Govt. upgrading officers of Directorates as A class and subordinate offices situated elsewhere remaining as B class - Order of upgradation not arbitrary - In view of method of recruitment under the service rules employees of subordinate offices cannot be treated at par with Directorate employees for being treated as being in common cadre - Also, subordinate offices and Directorate could not be treated as one unit. Common seniority - State Govt. upgrading offices of Directorates as A class and subordinate offices situated elsewhere remaining as B class - Validity. Where the State Govt. upgraded the offices of Directorates under the Agricultural Department as A class and subordinate offices situated elsewhere remaining as B class, the order of upgradation would not be violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, in view of the fact that the Punjab Subordinate Agricultural Service Rules (1933) themselves made a distinction between the persons appointed in the Directorate and the Subordinate Offices as separate cadres and the subordinate cadre in some cases is the feeder cadre for promotion to the Head Office. In this view, by no stretch of imagination, the employees in ....