1996(8) Supreme 127
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.C. Agrawal and G.T. Nanavati, JJ.
Union of India & Ors. -Appellants
versus
Vipinchandra Hiralal Shah -Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 4786 of 1994
Decided on 25-10-1996
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : K.N. Shukla, Sr. Advocate, Hemant Sharma and S.N. Terdol, Advocates.
For the Respondent : H.S. Parihar, Kuldeep S. Parihar, Advocates.
Held that in view of the provisions contained in Regulation 5, unless there is a good reason for not doing so, the Selection Committee is required to meet every year for the purpose of making the selection from amongst State Civil Service officers who fulfil the conditions regarding eligibility on the first day of the January of the year in which the Committee meets and fall within the zone of consideration as prescribed in clause (2) of Regulation 5. The failure on the part of the Selection Committee to meet during a particular year would not dispense with the requirement of preparing the Select List for that year. If for any reason the Selection Committee is not able to meet during a particular year, the Committee when it meets next, should, while making the selection, prepare a separate list for each year keeping in view the number of vacancies in that year after considering the State Civil Service officers who were eligible and fall within the zone of consideration for selection in that year. (Para 9)
(ii) SERVICE LAW-Promotion to Indian Administrative Service from State Civil Service-Selection Committee did not meet during years 1980 to 1985-It met in December 1986/January 1987-Consolidated Select List prepared for vacancies of years 1980 to 1986-Challenged-State Civil Service officers selected in consolidated list not impleaded as parties-Their appointment to service cannot be upset-Necessary directions made. (Paras 10 & 11)
JUDGMENT
S.C. Agrawal, J.-The short question that falls for consideration in this appeal is whether it is permissible to club vacancies of a number of years while preparing the select list for promotion to the Indian Administrative Service (for short Service ) from the State Civil Service. By the impugned judgment dated November 30, 1993 the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) has held that such clubbing of vacancies is not permissible and that separate select lists should be prepared by the Selection Committee for each year.
2. The Indian Administrative Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 make provision for appointment to the Service by promotion from amongst the substantive members of a State Civil Service [Rules 4(1)(b) and 8(1)]. Such promotion to the Service from the State Civil Service is governed by The Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations ). Regulation 3 makes provision for constitution of a Committee to make the selection. Regulation 5 prescribes the procedure for making the selection by the Committee and the preparation of a list. The said list prepared by the Committee in accordance with Regulation 5 is required to be forwarded by the State Government to the Union Public Service Commission (Regulation 6) and the list as approved by the Union Public Service Commission forms the select list for purpose of promotion of the members of the State Civil Service (Regulation 7). Appointments to the Service are made by the Central Government on the recommendation of the State Government from the said Select List (Regulation 9).
3. The respondent was a member of the Gujarat Administrative Service Class I, having been recruited to the said service in the year 1967. The select list for promotion to the Service from the State Civil Service was prepared by the Selection Committee under the Regulations in July 1979. Even though respondent had put in the requisite 8 years continuous service in the State Civil Service in July 1979, he was not considered by the Selection Committee because he fell outside the zone of consideration. Thereafter no select list was prepared for promotion of State Civil Service officers in Gujarat till December 1986/January 1987. The respondent was not selected in the said selection. He filed a petition (O.A. No. 646 Of 1988) before the Tribunal wherein he assailed the select list prepared by the Selection Committee in December 1986/January 1987 on the ground that it was not permissible to club together the vacancies of the years 1980 to 1986 for the purpose of making selection under Regulation 5 of the Regulations and that Selection Committee should have met every year to prepare a select list for the vacancies of each year. The said application submitted by the respondent has been allowed by the Tribunal by the impugned judgment. The Tribunal has held that the action of the appellants in clubbing the vacancies and thereby enlarging the zone of consideration could have prejudiced the respondent and, therefore, it was illegal. The Tribunal has directed the appellant to prepare select list from year to year from 1980 to 1986 and thereafter on the basis of vacancies from year to year without clubbing the vacancies in any particular year and as the part of the exercise to consider the case of the respondent for promotion to the Service and should his name figure in the select list and, should the vacancies permit, to appoint him to the Service and to give him all consequential benefits on the basis of such appointment from the date of the appointment. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the Tribunal, the appellant has filed this appeal.
4. The relevant provisions contained in Regulation 5, as in force in 1980, were as under :-
"Regulation 5.
(1) Each Committee shall ordinarily meet at intervals not exceeding one year and prepare a list of such members of the State Civil
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.