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

2007 Supreme(SC) 526

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N. AGRAWAL, P.P. NAOLEKAR & LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
SHAILENDRA DANIA & OTHERS - PETITIONER
Versus
S.P. DUBEY & OTHERS - RESPONDENT
Appeal (civil) 2219-2222 of 2002
with
Civil Appeal No. 4104 of 2002, Transferred Cases (Civil) Nos.
83 & 84 of 2005, Transferred Cases (Civil) Nos. 2, 3, 46, 47, 48, 49 &
50 of 2006 and Civil Appeal No. of 2007 (arising out of
SLP(C) No. 9239 of 2002)]
Decided on 17/04/2007

JUDGMENT:

P.P. NAOLEKAR, J.

Leave granted in S.L.P.(C) No. 9239 of 2002.

The appellants and the respondents herein are employees of the Slum Wing Department (hereinafter referred as "SWD"). SWD was part of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred as "MCD") before 1974. SWD was transferred from MCD to Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred as "DDA") in 1974 with the stipulation that its employees alone would be considered for confirmation and promotions against the posts in it. In 1978, SWD was retransferred to MCD, but once again in May 1980 it was transferred back to DDA with the stipulation that it would remain as a separate entity and its employees would not be merged with DDA. For recruitment of various staff members in DDA, vide its Resolution No.574 dated 13.11.1963, DDA adopted Recruitment Rules of CPWD qua the posts of Junior Engineer, Assistant Engineer and Executive Engineer. In the hierarchy of Engineering Cadre, the initial post is of Junior Engineer (Section Officer or S.O.). The post is meant for 100% direct recruitment and the qualification prescribed was "Diploma-holders in Civil Engineering with two years experience". However, there was no bar for persons possessing higher qualification, viz., Degree in Engineering, for applying to the post of Junior Engineer and such persons were not required to have any prior experience for appointment to the cadre of Junior Engineer in DDA. The next higher post is that of Assistant Engineer. The rule provided filling up of 50% vacancies on the post of Assistant Engineer by those who acquired a Graduate Degree in Engineering by means of direct recruitment or by deputation. The remaining 50% vacancies were to be filled up on promotional basis from the pool of Junior Engineers. Out of 50% of the promotional feeder cadre of Junior Engineers, one-half of such posts would be filled up by promotion of diploma-holders with eight years qualifying service and remaining 50% quota would be filled up from the Junior Engineers who were Graduate Engineering Degree-holders with three years qualifying service. Thus, the diploma-holders having eight years of qualifying service and Graduate Engineering Degree-holders with three years qualifying service would be considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer within their quota of 25% each. Further promotion in the Engineering Branch is from the post of Assistant Engineer to the post of Executive Engineer. The minimum qualifying experience for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer for graduate Engineers is eight years experience in the grade of Assistant Engineer, whereas for diploma-holders it is ten years service in the grade of Assistant Engineer. The appellants were graduates with Engineering Degree and joined the Department as Junior Engineers as direct recruits. On 7.6.1985 and 24.6.1985, some diploma-holder Junior Engineers were promoted on ad hoc basis as Assistant Engineers. First phase of litigation

In the year 1984, the Junior Engineers and the Assistant Engineers, who were diploma-holders, assailed constitutional validity of the rules in the matter of requirement of differential service experience between the graduates and the diploma-holders for promotion to the higher cadres, viz., Assistant Engineers and Executive Engineers respectively before Delhi High Court. In W.P. No.2132 of 1984 (Kimti Lal Kathuria and Others v. DDA), the challenge was to the rule prescribing three years and eight years service experience for graduates and diploma-holders respectively to he posts of Assistant Engineers and a discrimination thus brought about between them. W.P. No.2082 of 1984 (Niranjan Goel and Others v. DDA) pertained to the constitutional validity of the analogous provisions in the rules adopted by Resolution No.105 dated 16.6.1971. The distinction made for promotion of degree-holder promotees and diploma-holder promotees was struck down by Delhi High Court. It was held that the diploma-holders sh





































































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