1. Promotion eligibility for EO/AO post — dispute over whether required five-year regular service must be completed specifically in the region where promotion is sought or cumulatively across regions. (Para 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2017 Supreme(SC) 442
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.A. BOBDE, L. NAGESWARA RAO, JJ.
M.M. Thomas & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 5300-5301 of 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 30141-30142 of 2011)
Decided On : 17-04-2017
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
Requirement of five years’ regular service “in the respective regions” does not mean five years experience in the region where promotion is sought.
Requirement of five years’ regular service “in the respective regions” does not mean five years experience in the region where promotion is sought.
Subject
Employment Law - Promotion and Transfer
Headnote
Service law – Promotion – Requirement of five years’ regular service “in the respective regions” – Does not mean five years experience in the region where promotion is sought. (Para 8)
(1996) 1 SCC 524 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
The appellants were working as Social Security Assistants (SSAs) in the Karnataka/Tamil Nadu regions of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation. They were transferred to Kerala region and kept at the bottom in the seniority list. The notification was issued to fill up the post of EO/AO in the Kerala region. Both the appellants and the private party respondents participated in the aforesaid examination. The appellants are at Serial No. 1, 2, 4 and 5 respectively in the rank list and the promotion list.
The appellants as also the private party respondents passed the departmental competitive examination for the post of EO/AO.
Apprehending that the appellants will be promoted earlier, the private party respondents approached the Tribunal by way of filing original applications. The Tribunal allowed the said applications and held that the appellants herein were not treated as qualified for promotion i.e. eligible on the ground that they had not put in five years’ service in the Kerala region of EPFO, having relied on the words in the above quoted Rule which requires five years’ regular service “in the respective regions”.
Being aggrieved, the appellants filed original petitions before the High Court which were also dismissed.
Finding of the Court:
Requirement of five years’ regular service “in the respective regions” does not mean five years experience in the region where promotion is sought.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether the phrase 'in the respective regions' in the promotion rule requires five years of service exclusively in the region of promotion or total service across all regions. (Para 5 , 7 )
3. In All India Services, routine transfers occur; the rule's intent is to prevent officers from losing experience in the feeder cadre due to transfers between regions. (Para 8 , 9 )
4. Service rendered in previous regions counts toward the total experience required for promotion eligibility in a new region, regardless of seniority placement. (Para 8 , 10 )
5. Appeals allowed — impugned judgments set aside — appellants declared eligible and qualified for promotion to the post of EO/AO in the Kerala region. (Para 11 )
6. Does the requirement of regular service 'in the respective regions' for promotion imply service exclusively in the region where the promotion is sought?
No. It means the candidate should have served for the required period in total, including both the previous place of posting and the present place of posting. (Para 8 )
7. How does the nature of an All India Service affect the interpretation of regional service requirements for promotion?
Since officers in All India Services are routinely transferred between regions, rules are interpreted to ensure they are not deprived of their feeder cadre experience merely due to such transfers. (Para 8 )
8. Does being placed at the bottom of a seniority list after transfer negate previous service for the purpose of promotion eligibility?
No. While a transfer may result in being placed at the bottom of the seniority list, the regular service rendered at the previous unit still counts toward eligibility for promotion. (Para 10 )
JUDGMENT :
S.A. Bobde, J.
Leave granted.
2. The appellants have preferred these appeals against the impugned common judgment and order dated 10.8.2011 passed by the High Court of Kerala in O.P.(CAT) Nos.2518 and 2525 of 2011, whereby the High Court affirmed the order dated 19.7.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam (for short, the ‘Tribunal), dismissing O.A. Nos.723 and 970 of 2010, filed by the private party respondents. The Tribunal held that the appellants do not have the requisite experience in the Kerala region as on the date on which the vacancies were notified, and set aside the inclusion of their names in the rank list for promotion to the post of Enforcement Officer/Accounts Officer (for short, the ‘EO/AO’). The Tribunal further held that if the private party respondents are otherwise eligible, the official respondents are directed to take steps to consider their rank obtained in the examination and include their names in the appropriate place in the rank list for promotion to the post of EO/AO. The Tribunal also directed that the next available candidate in the rank list should be included in the rank list, according to the rank obtained by them.
3. The facts of the case in nutshell are as follows :
The appellants were working as Social Security Assistants (SSAs) in the Karnataka/Tamil Nadu regions of the Employees Provident Fund Organisation (for short, the ‘EPFO’). They were transferred to Kerala region and kept at the bottom in the seniority list. The notification was issued to fill up the post of EO/AO in the Kerala region. Both the appellants and the private party respondents participated in the aforesaid examination. Subsequently, the rank list was published. The appellants are at Serial No. 1, 2, 4 and 5 respectively in the rank list and the promotion list. It was contended by the private party respondents that the inclusion of the names of the appellants in these lists is arbitrary and illegal, because they were not eligible.
4. The rule that governs the eligibility of the appellants reads as follows :
| In case of recruitment by promotion/deputation/absorption, grade from which promotion/deputation/absorption to be made. | (i) PROMOTION (OTHER THAN EXAMINATION QUOTA): ……………… (ii) BY PROMOTION ON THE BASIS OF DEPARTMENTAL COMPETITIVE EXAMINATION # [Section Supervisor AND Junior Hindi Translator with 3 years regular service in the scale of Rs.5000-8000/-and DEO (Grade-C) with three years' regular service in the scale of Rs.5000-8000/-including those DEO (Grade-C) who have already put in 5 years' regular service in DEO (Grade-A) and Social Security Assistants/ Assistants/ Stenographers/ and DEO (grade-A and B) with 5 years regular service in the scale of Rs.4000-6000/-in the respective regions] |
5. The appellants as also the private party respondents passed the departmental competitive examination for the post of EO/AO.
Apprehending that the appellants will be promoted earlier, the private party respondents approached the Tribunal by way of filing original applications. The Tribunal allowed the said applications and held that the appellants herein were not treated as qualified for promotion i.e. eligible on the ground that they had not put in five years’ service in the Kerala region of EPFO, having relied on the words in the above quoted Rule which requires five years’ regular service “in the respective regions”.
6. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed original petitions before the High Court which were also dismissed. Hence these appeals by special leave.
7. Thus, the only issue before us is whether under the aforesaid Rule, the candidates who seek promotion through departmental competitive examination for the post of EO/AO, should have served, both in their earlier place of posting and their present place of posting for a period of five years, or whether the candidates should have served for five years in the region where they seek promotion, which in this case
