Roster Points Cannot Decide Seniority Of Judges: Madras HC

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

• The State of Tamil Nadu and the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission had maintained that the roster positions would be used to govern the inter se seniority of the judicial officers recruited.
• The TNPSC, while recruiting, was following the 200- point roster system and then forwarded the list of successful candidates to the High Court for acceptance.
• In this process, there were chances that a Meritorious Reserved Category candidate, (MRC) could jump out of the reserved category and get a roster position, which was earmarked for the General Category candidates.
• This was because, by merit, such a candidate would have made the cut without any reservation on stand.

COMMENTS BY JUSTICE BANERJEE

While referring to a catena of Supreme Court precedents, Chief Justice Banerjee observed that:

• Considering the said issue, it is no longer res integra and it cannot be contended that the roster position would be used to determine the seniority of the recruits in any recruitment process.
• Therefore, the seniority of the persons inducted to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division) from 2009 onwards should be determined in accordance with the marks that are obtained by the successful candidates in the recruitment examination.
• It was decided that the appointee having the highest marks would be placed in the first position and the appointee with the lowest marks among the successful candidates would be placed in the last position in the prepared list as per the seniority, irrespective of, and completely without reference to, the positions such appointees may have occupied on the 200-point roster.

OBSERVATION THE COURT

• The Madras High Court has held that the 200-point roster system followed by Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission cannot be considered as a ground for determining the inter-se seniority among civil judges.
• This system was followed by Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) to apply the rule of reservation while recruiting them.
• A Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy provided an alternative that the seniority must be fixed only on the basis of marks obtained by the candidates in the recruitment examination.
• The seniority list of Civil Judge(Junior Division) from 2009 onwards must follow this judgement. For the promotions that had already been granted, they need not be disturbed. Any fixation or re-fixation of seniority will remain unaffected by this order, which were made in accordance with law for judges recruited prior to 2009.
• These directions would also apply to the recruitment processes which were conducted in 2009, 2012, 2015 and 2018. As per the law given in this judgement, the seniority list for the appointees pursuant to the 2020 recruitment will also be governed.

WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ABOUT THIS?