IMPORTANT POINT
The grouping together of employees in Group B in scale 940-1660 and in Group C in scale 880-1510 in Schedule IV belonging to the non-gazetted category with Group A gazetted officers in Schedule IV in scale 880-1510 for promotion as Manager etc. in the scale of Rs. 1000-1820 under the Bihar Industries Service Rules, 1987 is not violative of Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:Bihar Industries Service Rules, 1987-Rules contained in Annexure-I, Schedule IV (Rules 11 to 15)-Constitutional validity of - Under impugned rules non-gazetted category of officers i.e. field employees and statistical employees of senior scales are included alongwith gazetted categories for promotion to post of Manager/Assistant Manager-Not violative of Article 14 of Constitution-There may be varied reasons or situations or considerations that may be basis for decision in clubbing two groups together to improve chances of promotion, even though one was a feeder channel for other-Rule 12 increased quota for promotees from 50 to 75 to accommodate Groups B and C also in channel of promotion-More posts of Managers are to be manned by those having experience in some other areas as well-Quota in manager s post increased from 50% to 75% towards this end-Impugned rules not violative of Articles 14 and 16(1).
Held : There may be varied reasons or situations or considerations that may be the basis for a decision by Government in clubbing two groups together to improve the chances of promotion, even though one was a feeder channel for the other. In the present case, it is also important to note that under Rule 12, Government stated that the quota for promotees could extend from 50% to 75% if suitable promotees were available. This increase in promotional quota was indeed intended to accommadate the Groups B and C also in the channel to the promotion category. Secondly, the Group A officers were in the Scale of Rs. 880-1510. Once in the Group B, the Senior Selection grade officers were put in the scale of Rs. 940-1660, it was not permissible-even though they were in non-gazetted category - to bring them down to the scale of Rs. 880-1510 in the gazetted category by reducing their grade and then to promote them as Managers etc. in Rs. 1000-1820. That was indeed the implication of the contention of the gazetted category. Once these officers in Group B were getting a higher scale than those in Group A, and if Government felt that they should be brought into the feeder group, the same could not be treated as irrational. Similarly, on the same considerations, Group C officers drawing Rs. 880-1510, which was a scale equivalent to the scale of Group Aofficers, were also included in the feeder category, this could not by itself be treated as irrational. One other important consideration,-as stated in the Government s counter - was that among Managers, it was felt that there must be more persons having experience in Extension posts and Statistical/Investigator posts in the group B and C categories. Those who might have reached through an intermediate post, if any, were not found sufficient, even assuming that those from B and C groups could have first gone to Group A and then as Managers. The promotion quota could go beyond 50% to 75% if suitable persons were available. In addition to this the State Government explained in their counter affidavit filed in the High Court that, in respect of the inclusion of the senior scale officers of Groups B and C, the Public Service Commission was consulted and it concurred with the policy of inclusion of these groups in the feeder channel. Industrial Extension Officers posts were created in all the Districts and they have their importance in preparation and industrial planning. In Manager cadre, people with such experience were considered necessary. Most of the posts in the scale of Rs. 1000-1820 were also created at District level. If Government kept these facts and the scales of pay in mind when they made the provision creating the avenue of promotion from Group B and Group C employees, it cannot, in our opinion, be held to be irrational. The use of the word "just below" in Rule 11(a) did not mean just below in the gazetted category. The question here is whether there was some rational basis for including these posts in the feeder categories. Two or three reasons have been given. One was that those in senior scale in Group B were drawing higher scale than Group A. Those in higher scale in Group C were drawing same scale as Group A. The posts of Manager in Rs.1000-1820 were mostly in Districts and those working in same or higher scales in certain lower posts were included because in the promotional post of Managers those having experience in these areas where these group B and Group C employees were having experience, were felt necessary. In other words, more posts of Managers were to be manned by those having experience in some other areas as well and that is why the quota in the Manager s post as per Rule 12 could go beyond 50% upto 75% for promotees, if suitable hands were available. The considerations in our view cannot be ignored nor characterised as irrational. (Paras 24 & 25)

JUDGMENT

M. Jagannadha Rao, J.-Leave granted in both the special leave petitions.

2. These two appeals arise out of the judgment in LPA 73/91 dated 9.9.1998 rendered by the Patna High Court. The appellants in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP No. 21041 of 1998 are members of the Bihar State Subordinate Industries Filed Officers Association (hereinafter called the Field Employees ) while the appellants in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP 1133/99 are members of the Industrial Department Statistical Employees Association (hereinafter called the Statistics Employees ). Both groups belong to the Non-gazetted Service in Bihar and the dispute is between these two groups on the one hand and Sri Kapildeo Prasad Singh and others who belong to the Gazetted Service on the other. The learned Single Judge of the High Court of Patna held that the Rule contained in Annexure-I and in particular in Schedule IV of the Bihar Industries Service Rules, 1987 is ultra vires inasmuch as under that rule, the abovesaid non-gazetted category of officers i.e. field employees and statistical employees of Senior scales were included alongwith the gazetted categrories, for promotion to the post of Manager/Assistant-Director etc. in the then scale of Rs. 1000-1820. The said decision of the learned Single Judge was upheld by the Division Bench. Aggrieved by the consequent exclusion from the channel of promotion, these two sets of non-gazetted employees have filed these appeals.

3. We have to point out that the Statistics Employees have filed their SLP seeking leave as they were not parties in LPA 73/91. What happened was that the gazetted category of employees who were aggrieved by the inclusion of the field employees in the promotional channel filed writ petition CWJC 5352 of 1987 in the High Court. The learned Single Judge struck down the relevant rule not only in so far as the field officers were concerned but also in relation to Statistics employees. The Statistic Employees in Grade 880-1510 were not heard. They therefore filed LPA No. 82 of 1991. It was clarified by a separate judgment dated 20.5.1993 in LPA 82 of 1991 by a Division Bench that the judgment of the learned Single Judge would not affect the statistics employees in grade 880-1510 who belonged to the Economic Investigating group. But unfortunately, this order was not noticed by the Division Bench which disposed of LPA 73/91 filed by the Field Employees against the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The Division Bench in its order dated 9.9.98 affirmed the entire judgment of the learned Single Judge i.e. even that part which struck down the promotion channel for the statistics employees. Apprehending that this judgment dated 9.9.98 amounted to striking down the rule in so far as the statistics employees were also concerned,- in spite of what was said in LPA 82 of 1991- the Statistics employees filed SLP 1133/99, with leave. Having regard to the fact that these issues are pending from 1987, and that the striking down of the entire rule remained stayed and both Field Employees and Statistics Employees were given promotions under the impugned rule, we are deciding the matter on mertis both in respect of the Field Employees and the Statistics Employees.

4. We may refer to a few facts : In letter dated 24.12.86, the State of Bihar (Industries Department) wrote to the Accountant General, Bihar that in the light of the judgment of the High Court (Ranchi Bench) in CWJC 739/80(R) and 740/80(R), the State had taken a decision for sanctioning the following scales of Pay in Selection Grade and Senior Selection Grade for promotion and grant of higher scale of pay of Industries Extension Officers. The scale of pay which was Rs. 310-490 would stand revised as Rs. 400-660. Similarly pay of the said officers in Selection Grade would stand revised as Rs. 415-745. Along with this, the State took a decision to create 20% out of the total strength of 270 posts i.e. 54 posts in the Selection Grade Scale of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2000 Supreme(SC) 1030

Cases Referred (5)

Login now and unlock premium legal research