SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1974 Supreme(SC) 422

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, P.N. BHAGWATI AND P.K. GOSWAMI, JJ.
A. K Subraman and others, Petitioners
Versus
Union of India and others. Respondents.
Writ Petn. No. 489 of 1972 and Civil Appeals Nos. 1745 to 1747 of 1974.
D/- 11-12-1974.
(1) W. P. No. 489 Of l972:
(2) Civil Appeals Nos. 1745 to 1747 of l974:
S.S.Ojha etc. etc. APpellants
Versus
Union of India and others. Respondents. 484
Advocates appeared
M. C. Bhandare, Sr. Advocate (P.H. Parekh and Mrs. S. Bhandare Advocates of M/s. Bhandare Parekh & Co. with him). for Petitioners (in W. P. 489/72) and for Appellants (in C. A. 1745/74); Lal Narain Sinha, Sol Gen. (M/s. S. N. Prasad and R.N. Sachthey, Advocates, with him), for Respondents Nos. 1-3 (in W. P. 489/72). K S. Ramamurthi ,Sr. Advocate (M/s. S. Balakrishnan and M. M. Ghatate, Advocates of M/s. Balakrishnan and Ghatate, with him) for Respondents Nos. 5, 23, 27, 31. 53 ,59 & 65 (In W. P. 489/72). S. Markandeya, Advocate for Respondents Nos. 71, 73, 83, 87, 93, 94, 96, 98, 103, 107, 109 & 111-113. (in W. P. 489/72). P. P. Rao, Advocate for Intervener Nos. 1-8 (In W. P.No. 489/72). P. H. Parekh and Mrs. S. Bhandare Advocates of M/s Bhandare Parekh & Co. for Intervener No. 8 (In W. P. No. 489/72). 485 P. P. Rao, Advocate for Appellants (In C. As. 1746-1747 /1974). Balakrishnan and N. M. Ghatate, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 (In all the Appeals ).

Advocates:
Balakrishnan, Bhandare Parekh, Ghatate, K.S.Ramamurthy, M.C.BHANDARE, M.M.Gharekhan, N.M.GHATATE, Narain Sinha, P.H.Parekh, P.P.Rao, R.M.Sachthey, S.BALAKRISHNAN, S.Bhandan, S.Bhandare, S.Markandaya, S.N.PRASAD

Headnote:

Union Public Service Commission Rule 2 (c) - Recruitment Rules - Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Assistant Executive Engineer - Appellants in Civil Appeals who were recruited directly to Class II as a result of competitive examination in which they had failed to secure requisite marks for being selected for Class 1 are also confirmed Assistant Engineers in Grade II and have been officiating as Executive Engineers in Grade - They have obtained special leave against Full Bench judgment of Delhi High Court in their writ petitions under Article 226 of Constitution decided by a common judgment - Since a common question of law is involved in all these matters this judgment will govern all above matters - Court will therefore include appellants also in describing them as petitioners in this judgment – Held, Judgment of High Court is set aside - Respondents 1 to 3 in Writ Petition (respondent No-1 being common in other two Appeals) are directed to amend and revise seniority list of in light of directions in this judgment and to give effect thereafter to revised seniority list so prepared - Revision of seniority list shall not; however affect those employees who are not impleaded in proceedings before this Court and who have already been promoted in higher grades in Service- Respondents 1 to 3 will pay costs of petitioners in Writ Petition and respondent No 1 will pay to appellants in Civil Appeals costs throughout - Writ Petition and Appeals allowed

Judgment

GOSWAMI, J.: - The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 489 of 1972 are confirmed Assistant Engineers in the Central Engineering Service (Class II). They were promoted to officiate as Executive Engineers in Class I between December 27, 1956 and September 8, 1959, by a properly constituted Departmental Promotion Committee and have been working as Executive Engineers in the Central Public Works Department of the Ministry of Works and Housing of the Government of India. Except one petitioner (namely, K. G. Chopra) all the petitioners were promoted to the grade of Executive Engineer prior to their confirmation as Assistant Engineers. The respondents 4 to 66 were initially recruited as Assistant Executive Engineers in Class 1 and were promoted to the grade of Executive Engineer between the period March 11, 1957 and February 23, 1966.

2. The appellants in Civil Appeals Nos. 1745 of 1974 and 1746 and 1747 of 1974, who were recruited directly to Class II as a result of competitive examination in which they had failed to secure requisite marks for being selected for Class 1 are also confirmed Assistant Engineers in Grade II and have been officiating as Executive Engineers in Grade I. They have obtained special leave against the Full Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court in their writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution decided by a common judgment of 20th May, 1971.* Since a common question of law is involved in all these matters, this judgment will govern all the above matters. We will, therefore, include the appellants also in describing them as petitioners in this judgment.

* reported in 1971 Lab I C 1553 (Delhi) (FB).

3. The Service with which we are concerned is the Central Engineering Service, Class 1. According to the Central Engineering Service. Class I, Recruitment Rules (briefly the Rules) framed in the year 1954 by S. R. O. 1841 dated May 21, 1954, which are admittedly similar to those of 1949 Recruitment Rules, officers in the grade of Assistant Executive Engineer (Class I) and certain Assistant Engineers (Class II, are eligible for promotion to the grade of Executive Engineer (Class I). The vacancies in the grade of Executive Engineer can only be filled by promotion from the aforesaid two grades in the ratio of 75 and 25 . The aforesaid quota was retrospectively altered with effect from September 7, 1955, to 66-2/3 and 33-1/3 .

4. Part I of the Rules contains the definitions By Rule 2 (b) thereof, "The Commission" means the Union Public Service Commission Rule 2 (c) defines "The Service" as the Central Engineering Service, Class I. The Service includes various grades of posts.

5. Rules 3, 4 and 5 relevant for our purpose are as under:

"3. Recruitment to the Service shall be made by any of the following methods:

(a) By competitive examination in India in accordance with Part III of these rules.

(b) By promotion in accordance with Part IV of these Rules.

(c) By transfer in accordance with Part V of these Rules.

4. (1) All appointments to the Service or to posts borne upon the cadre of the Service shall be made by Government.

(2) Subject to the provisions of Rule 3 Government shall determine the method or methods of requirement (sic) (recruitment?) to be employed for the purpose of filling any particular vacancies in the Service or such vacancies therein as may be required to be filled during any particular period and the number of candidates to be recruited by each method:

Provided that all recruitments by competitive examination (vice part III of the rules) shall be to the grade of Assistant Executive Engineer, Class I only.

Seventy-five per cent of the vacancies in the grade of Executive Engineer, Class I, shall be filled by promotion of Assistant Executive Engineers, Class I, the rest of the vacancies being filled by promotion and/or by transfer in accordance with Paris IV and V of the Rules respectively.

5. Appointments to the Service made otherwise than by promotion will be subject to orders issued from time to tim























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top