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

1991 Supreme(SC) 660

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
L.M. SHARMA, J.S. VERMA AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.
N. Suresh Nathan and another, Appellants
Versus
Union of India and others, Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4542 of 1991, D/-22-11-1991.

Advocates:
A.S.NAMBIYAR, K.R.CHOUDHARY, P.K.MANOHARAN, P.P.Rao, P.P.TRIPATHI, P.S.NARASIMHA, SANGITA GARG, SANTOSH HEGDE, SHANTA VASUDEVAN, VIJAY LAKSHMI MENON

Headnote:

Recruitment Rules – Rules 7 and 11 - Post of Assistant Engineer - Anti Corruption - Appointment by direct recruitment and promotion - Whether a Diploma-holder Junior Engineer who obtains a Degree while in service becomes eligible for appointment as Assistant Engineer by promotion on completion of three years service including therein period of service prior to obtaining Degree or three years service as a Degree holder for this purpose is to be reckoned from date he obtains Degree - Diploma-holders contend that they are entitled - To include earlier period and would be eligible for promotion in this category on obtaining Degree if total period of service is three years inclusive of the earlier period - Degree-holders contest this position and contend to contrary - According to the Degree-holders, these are two distinct categories - In first category are Degree-holders with three years service in grade as Degree-holders, the period of three years being subsequent to date of obtaining Degree as in case of Junior Engineers who join the service with a Degree and other category is of Diploma-holders with six years experience – Held, Service in the grade as a Diploma-holder prior to obtaining the Degree cannot be counted as service in grade with a Degree for the ,purpose of three years service as a Degree1 holder - Only question before us is of the construction of provision and not of the validity thereof and therefore Court are only required to construe the rewinding of the provision - In Court opinion contention of appellants Degree-holders that the rules must be construed to mean that three years service in the grade of a Degree-holder for the purpose of R. 11 is three years from date of obtaining the Degree is quite tenable and commends-to us being in conformity with the past practice followed consistently. It has also been so understood by all concerned till raising of the present controversy recently by respondents - Tribunal was therefore not justified in taking the contrary view and unsettling the settled practice in the Department - Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT

VERMA, J.:- The Recruitment Rules for the Post of Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department, Pondicherry, prescribe the educational and other qualifications for appointment by direct recruitment and promotion. For direct recruits, the qualification prescribed is a Degree in Civil Engineering of a recognised University or Diploma in Civil Engineering from a recognised institution with three years professional experience. For appointment by promotion of Section Officers now called Junior Engineers, the qualification prescribed is as under:-

1. Section Officers possessing a recognised Degree in Civil Engineering or equivalent with three years service in the grade failing which Section Officers holding Diploma in Civil Engineering with six years service in the grade -50%.

2. Section Officers possessing a recognised Diploma in Civil Engineering with six years service in the grade -50%."

2. The dispute in the present case is whether a Diploma-holder Junior Engineer who obtains a Degree while in service becomes eligible for appointment as Assistant Engineer by promotion on completion of three years service including therein the period of service prior to obtaining the Degree or the three years service as a Degreeholder for this purpose is to be reckoned from the date he obtains the Degree. The Diploma-holders contend that they are entitled. To include the earlier period and would be eligible for promotion in this category on obtaining the Degree if the total period of service is three years inclusive of the earlier period. The Degree-holders contest this position and contend to the contrary. According to the Degree-holders, these are two distinct categories. In the first category are Degree-holders with three years service in the grade as Degree-holders, the period of three years being subsequent to the date of obtaining the Degree as in the case of the Junior Engineers, who join the service with a Degree; and the other category is of Diploma-holders with six years experience.

3. The Diploma-holder went to . the Central Administrative Tribunal with this contention and the Tribunal has upheld their claim and directed as under:

"In the light of the above, we hold that the applicants are entitled to the relief asked for and accordingly we direct the respondents to consider them for promotion. to the post of Assistant Engineer on par with the other Degree-holder. Junior Engineers, taking due note of their total length of service rendered in the grade of Junior Engineer. Such a consideration should be along side other Junior Engineers who might have acquired the necessary Degree qualification earlier than the applicants, while holding the post of Junior Engineer. For this purpose, the first three respondents shall take necessary action to convene a review. D.P.C. and pass orders on the basis of the recommendations of that D.P.C. within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The application is allowed as above."

Hence this petition for grant of special leave by the Degree-holders. Leave is granted.

4. In our opinion, this appeal has to be allowed. There is sufficient material including the admission of respondents Diploma-holders that the practice followed in the Department for a long time was that in the case of Diploma-holder Junior Engineers who obtained the Degree during service, the period of three years service in the grade for eligibility for promotion as Degree-holders commenced from the date of obtaining the Degree and the earlier period of service as Diploma-holders was not counted for this purpose. This earlier practice was clearly admitted by the respondents Diploma-holders in para 5 of their application made to the Tribunal at page 115 of the paperbook. This also appears to be the view of the Union Public Service Commission contained in their letter dated December 6, 1968 extracted) at pages 99-100 of the paperbook in the counter affidavit of respondents 1 to 3. The real question, th





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