Facts: The petitioner, initially scoring below the cut-off in the Common Entrance Test (CET) for Shikshan Sevak positions due to an error in answer sheet checking, was later awarded higher marks after a grievance committee review, leading to his appointment. He sought seniority from the date of the original CET results declaration, claiming a loss of four years due to the initial error.
Procedural Posture: The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the Bombay High Court, seeking a direction to the Municipal Commissioner to count his seniority from the date of the CET results and to pay salary accordingly.
Issue: Can an employee claim seniority from a retrospective date, prior to their actual appointment, based on a mistake in the initial assessment of their qualifying examination, especially when they were not initially selected and the grievance was raised belatedly?
Holding: No, the petitioner cannot claim seniority from the date of the original CET results. The writ petition is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Court held that while there was a mistake in the initial answer sheet checking, the petitioner's right to appointment and seniority accrued only after the revised results and subsequent appointment. The petitioner's delay in raising the grievance and the absence of any rule allowing for retrospective seniority when the employee was not yet part of the cadre were also considered. The court distinguished the cited Supreme Court precedents, noting that in those cases, the appellants were initially selected, unlike the petitioner. The court stated, "It is a settled principle that an employee cannot be generally given seniority from a retrospective date when he is not yet 'borne in the cadre'".