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

1987 Supreme(SC) 525

A.P. SEN AND B.C. RAY, JJ.
Civil Appeals Nos. 622-625 of 1982.
D/8-6-1987.
P.D. Aggarwal and others, Appellants
 Versus
State of U.P. and others, Respondents.

Advocates:
A.K.PANDEY, A.K.Sanghi, ANIL GUPTA, M.N.SHROFF, P.D.SHARMA, R.B.MAHATO, S.Markandaya, SHOBHA DIXIT, SUNIL JAIN, V.J.Francis

Headnote:

Government of India Act, 1935 – Constitution Of India,1950 – Article 14, 16, 309, 313 - Amendment Act of 1971 - U.P. Service of Engineers Class II Rules - Rule 3(b), 5(i),(ii),(iii), 17, 19, 23, United Provinces Service of Engineers Class II (Amendment) Rules, 1969 - Rule 3 - Assistant Engineers - Long Years of Services - Permanent Post - Temporary Post - Seniority List - These appeals by special leave are against common judgment and order quashing seniority list in cadre of Assistant Engineers in United Provinces Class II - A writ of mandamus was also issued to State Government for preparation of fresh seniority list in respect of Assistant Engineers in Civil Engineering Wing and Electrical and Mechanical Wing respectively in accordance with guidelines mentioned in said judgment - Whether they are holding posts which remain as temporary for years together - Whether any rule or provision of any Act has violated principles of equality and non-arbitrariness and thereby invaded rights of citizens - Whether by substitution of R. 23 by amendment Act of 1971 long years of service already rendered by temporary Assistant Engineers who have become members of cadre of service of Assistant Engineers fulfilling all conditions can be arbitrarily and unreasonably excluded while fixing seniority and T category officers can be deprived of their long years of services toeing reckoned for determination of seniority - Whether appointed in a temporary post of cadre or in permanent post of cadre are recruited directly from Graduates in Civil Engineering – Held, Assistant Engineers who have been appointed substantively to temporary posts and have been working for years toegther after being duly recruited and selected by Public Service Commission as required under service rules have become members of service but so far as purely ad hoc employees or employees on purely officiating basis or employees purely for a temporary period in cadre of Assistant Engineer in Public Works Department being not members of service in accordance with service rules are not entitled to have benefit - Only those ad hoc appointees whose services have been regularised by regularisation rules framed under proviso to Art. 309 of Constitution after being duly selected by Selection Committee and becoming member of service, will be entitled to seniority only from date of order of appointment after selection in accordance with those regulations as provided in rule 7 of regulations – Court cannot but observe in this connection that though temporary Assistant Engineers have been duly selected by Public Service Commission after they are appointed as temporary Assistant Engineers yet in spite of several directions given by this Court, authorities concerned did not think it fit and proper to prepare seniority list in accordance with directions given by this Court and as a result no seniority list in cadre of Assistant Engineer has yet been prepared following directions made - In premises aforesaid court affirm judgment and order of High Court quashing said seniority list together with supplementary seniority lists relating to Civil Engineering Wing - Condition in Office Memorandum, Annexure 2 of Writ Petition providing that for selection for post of Superintending Engineer officer must be a confirmed Executive Engineer is quashed - A writ of mandamus be issued directing Government to prepare a fresh seniority list of Engineers in Civil Engineering and D.W. (sic) wing respectively in light of observations made hereinbefore - This order, however, will not affect any confirmations or promotions made - Appeal Dismissed.

Judgement

B.C. RAY, J. :- These appeals by special leave are against the common judgment and order dated 14-1-1982 quashing the seniority list in the cadre of Assistant Engineers in the United Provinces (Buildings and Roads Branch) Class II prepared on 29-7-1980 and 18-12-1980 with 19-12-1980. A writ of mandamus was also issued to the State Government for preparation of fresh seniority list in respect of Assistant Engineers in the Civil Engineering Wing and Electrical and Mechanical Wing respectively in accordance with the guidelines mentioned in the said judgment. The facts giving rise to these writ petitions are in brief as follows :-

Previously Public Health Department as well as the Irrigation Department of the Government of Uttar Pradesh were integrated into Public Works Department comprising both these two branches. In 1922 Irrigation branch was separated into a different independent department. Similarly, in 1927 Public Health Department was separated. In 1936 U.P. Service of Engineers Class II Rules (Buildings and Roads Branch) pertaining to P.W.D. were framed in exercise of powers conferred under the Government of India Act. Identical rules also governed the Irrigation Department. Before entering into the controversy that has been raised in the instant appeal it is appropriate to refer to the relevant provisions of the said rules. Rule 3(b) defines Member of the Service as a Government servant appointed in substantive capacity, under the provisions of these rules or of rules in force previous to the introduction in the cadres of the service. Clause (c) defines Direct recruitment or direct appointment as recruitment or appointment in the manner prescribed in R. 5(i), (ii) and (iii) of these rules. In R. 4 which is captioned as Strength of Cadre it is mentioned in Cl. (ii) of the said rule that the Government may increase the cadre by creating permanent or temporary posts from time to time as may be found necessary. Rule 5 lays down five sources of recruitment :

(i) by direct appointment from amongst engineer students who have passed out of Thomson Civil Engineering College, Roorkee, and who have completed a course of training in the Buildings and Roads Branch as engineer students after consulting the Public Service Commission;

(ii) by the appointment after (sic) advertisement and after consulting the Public Service Commission;

(iii) by the appointment of officers in the temporary service of the United Provinces Public Works Department, Buildings and Roads Branch, after consulting the Public Service Commission, Provided that it will not be necessary to consult the Commission in the case of appointment of a temporary officer to a permanent vacancy if he has already been appointed to a temporary post in the cadre of service after consultation with the Commission;

(iv) by promotion of members of the United Provinces Subordinate Engineering Service in the Public Works Department, Buildings and Roads Branch, who have shown exceptional merits;

(v) by promotion of computers in the Public Works Department, Buildings and Roads Branch, who have shown exceptional merit and who are technically qualified.

2. It has been specifically provided in R. 6 that the Government will decide in each case the source from which a vacancy shall be filled up provided that 25 of the vacancies shall be reserved for selected qualified members of the subordinate Engineering Service and computers. It thus provides that barring 25 of the vacancies to be filled by promotion from Engineering subordinate services and computers, the remaining 75 of the vacancies are to be filled up by direct recruitment as provided in sub-cls. (ii) and (iii) of R. 5.

3. Rule 17 which is termed as Probation specifically provides that all persons appointed to the service, who are not already in the permanent employ of the Buildings and Roads Branch of the United Provinces Government, shall be placed on probation for four years, provided that such of them as have undergone training





























































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