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

2013 Supreme(SC) 917

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Surinder Singh Nijjar, M.Y.Eqbal, JJ.
Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers Association – Appellant
VERSUS
The Secretary to Government Rural Development Department & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8758 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C.) No. 20986 of 2007)
WITH
Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers Association – Appellant
VERSUS
The Secretary to Government Rural Development Department & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8759 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C.) No. 15918 of 2007)
WITH
Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers Association – Appellant
VERSUS
The Secretary to Government Rural Development Department & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8762 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C.) No. 15988 of 2007)
WITH
Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers Association – Appellant
VERSUS
The Secretary to Government Rural Development Department & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8763 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C.) No. 16064 of 2007)
WITH
Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers Association – Appellant
VERSUS
The Secretary to Government Rural Development Department & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8764 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C.) No. 18310 of 2007)
WITH
Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers Association – Appellant
VERSUS
The Secretary to Government Rural Development Department & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8765 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C.) No. 20987 of 2007)
Decided On : 27-09-2013

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 309 - General Rules - Rule 39 - Appointments in RD Department – Promotion - Facts involved in controversy in all appeals are common court shall make reference to facts as narrated by High Court - This shall be supplemented by any additions made by parties in this Court - Facts noticed by High Court are that members of Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers Association hereinafter referred to as Appellants were initially appointed as Overseers by then Highways and Rural Works Department and posted exclusively to various Panchayat Unions for executing all Civil works Rural works in Panchayat Unions of Tamil Nadu - Since they were earlier administrative control of erstwhile Highways and Rural Works Department they had no proper avenues of promotion especially for post of Assistant Engineer for short and many of them were languishing in same post Overseers, for nearly two decades – Held, Appellants thereafter submitted that Overseers possessing degree qualification ought to be exempted from rendering five years service in Department for being considered for further promotion on basis of Assistant Executive Engineer - Court are unable to accept this submission as Appellants had willingly given option to be absorbed as Overseers - In case submission made by Appellants is accepted it would mean that Appellants were actually absorbed on post of Assistant Engineer which would be factually incorrect - Rules an Assistant Engineer can only be considered for promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer on completion of five years service in Department - Therefore it would not be possible to accept submission of Appellants that services rendered by Appellants in Highways Department ought to be substituted for service to be rendered in Department - Appellants have already been given benefit of two years service in Highways Department on basis that they had actually been functioning in Department since - But such concession would not create legal right in favor of Appellants to claim that services rendered in Highways Department ought to be treated as service rendered in Department - Court therefore see no merit in submissions that degree holder Overseers ought to be exempted from having rendered five years service in Department before they can be eligible to be considered for promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer - Appellants had relied on judgment of Sub Inspector and Another - Governor through Chief Secretary Delhi and Others in support of submission that their past service of years cannot obliterated - Aforesaid submission cannot be accepted for simple reason that Appellants were absorbed in Department as Overseers – Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT

SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, J.

1. Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.

2. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and final order dated 29th January, 2007 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition Nos. 26990 and 26973 of 2005; 36096 of 2004, Writ Appeal No.500 of 2005, Writ Petition Nos. 31416 of 2004 and 9460 of 2005. By this order, the High Court dismissed the Writ Petitions and the Writ Appeal filed by the Appellant-Association.

3. Since the facts involved in the controversy in all the appeals are common, we shall make a reference to the facts as narrated by the High Court. This shall be supplemented by any additions made by the parties in this Court.

4. The facts noticed by the High Court are that the members of the Tamil Nadu Rural Development Engineers' Association (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellants') were initially appointed as 'Overseers' by the then Highways and Rural Works Department and posted exclusively to various Panchayat Unions for executing all the Civil works / Rural works in the Panchayat Unions of Tamil Nadu. Since they were earlier under the administrative control of the erstwhile Highways and Rural Works Department, they had no proper avenues of promotion especially for the post of Assistant Engineer (for short ‘AE’) and many of them were languishing in the same post, i.e., as Overseers, for nearly two decades.

5. By virtue of G.O. Ms. No. 263, Rural Development Department (in short ‘RD Department’), dated 27th December, 1996, the Government of Tamil Nadu decided to set up a separate ‘Engineering Wing’ for the RD Department itself so as to exercise adequate control over various Central and State sponsored Schemes and accordingly several new posts such as Assistant Engineers (AE). Assistant Executive Engineers (AEE), Executive Engineers (EE) and Superintending Engineers (SE), were created.

6. By virtue of G.O. Ms. No. 102, RD Department, dated 25th May, 1998, the Government directed that the then Highways and Rural Works Department should cease forthwith from exercising control over the promotions and appointments in the RD Department. The Government Order also recognised the rights of the Overseers, whose entire service is only in the RD Department, for promotion to the posts of AEs and Junior Engineers (JEs). Finally, the Government framed Service Rules for various technical posts in the RD Department and notified the same in G.O. Ms. No. 15, dated 25th January, 2000, by invoking the powers under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. On 14th December, 2001 G.O. M.S. No. 295 (RD) Department was issued to amend the service rules with effect from 25th May, 1998

7. As soon as the Engineering Wing was created in the RD Department, the posts were filled up by drawing personnel from other technical Departments of Government of Tamil Nadu on 'deputation basis' as an interim arrangement. However, the Tamil Nadu Highway Engineers Association opposed the creation of a separate Engineering Wing under the RD Department and filed Original Application in O.A. No. 253 of 1997 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal (in short 'Tribunal'). This Application was dismissed by the Tribunal by order dated 12th November, 1997. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the Association filed W.P. No. 6513 of 1998 before the Madras High Court. By order dated 2nd April, 2002, the Madras High Court upheld the order of the Tribunal.

8. The constitutional Validity of G.O. Ms. No. 15, dated 25th January, 2000, and G.O. Ms. No. 102, dated 25th May, 1998, was challenged before the Tribunal by a group of individuals and by the Association of Tamil Nadu Engineering Graduates in O.A. Nos. 5338 and 7766 of 2000. Both the Government Orders were upheld by the Tribunal by order dated 3rd June, 2002.

9. A group of AE - Direct Recruits, on completion of five years of service in the RD Department, filed O.A. Nos.1068 to 1081 of 2004 before the Tribunal, praying that they



























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