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

2003 Supreme(Cal) 660

High Court Of Calcutta
Arun Kumar Mitra
AMIT KR.NANDI - Appellant
Versus
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. - Respondent
W. P.  8719  Of  2003
Decided On : 12/24/2003

Advocates Appeared:
ANIRBAN BISWAS, B.R.NEOGI, JOYDEEP SEN, KISHORE DUTTA, P.K.GHOSH, PRADIP SEN, SADANANDA GANGULY, SARDAR AMJAD ALI, SIKHA BHATTACHARYYA

Judicial review or judicial interference should not be done at a premature stage when there is no proof of discrimination or mala fide.

Headnote:

RECRUITMENT - TELECOM TECHNICAL ASSISTANTS (T. T. A.) - PROMOTION TO JUNIOR TELECOM OFFICER (JTO) - RELAXATION OF QUALIFYING STANDARDS FOR 15% DEPARTMENTAL QUOTA CANDIDATES - WHETHER DISCRIMINATORY AND VIOLATIVE OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - HELD, NO.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners, Telecom Technical Assistants (T. T. A.), challenged the relaxation of qualifying standards for 15% departmental quota candidates for promotion to Junior Telecom Officer (JTO) as discriminatory and violative of principles of natural justice. The petitioners, who belonged to the 35% departmental quota, contended that the relaxation would affect their seniority and that the authority's decision was mala fide.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioners' apprehension that the relaxation of eligibility standards for 15% quota candidates would affect their seniority was premature and did not amount to discrimination. The court further held that the policy of relaxation was based on intelligible criteria and was not discriminatory, and that the petitioners' writ petition was based on mere apprehension. The court also held that the petitioners had not proved that they were discriminated against while remaining in the zone of consideration for promotion, and that there was no scope for judicial interference.

Issues: 1. Whether the relaxation of qualifying standards for 15% departmental quota candidates for promotion to JTO was discriminatory and violative of principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the petitioners had proved that they were discriminated against while remaining in the zone of consideration for promotion?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The chance of promotion does not confer any right at the same time unless the petitioners can prove remaining in the zone of consideration for promotion, they have been discriminated. There is no scope of judicial interference. 2. The policy of relaxation is based on intelligible criteria and not discriminatory and this writ petition is based on mere apprehension.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and all interim orders were vacated.

A. K. MITRA, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been moved by 43 petitioners claiming to be working as Telecom Technical Assistant hereinafter termed as T. T. A.) under Calcutta Telecom Circle. Since Department of Telecommunication has been taken over by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (hereinafter termed as BSNL ). The petitioners can be said to be working under BSNL.

( 2 ) THE prayers of the petitioners in this writ petition are as follows: (A)a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus commanding their men, agents, or subordinates to take necessary steps for sending the petitioners for JTO training for promotion to the said Cadre (Junior Telecom Officer) by following list published on 24. 4. 1998 on the basis of screening test held on 29. 1. 1995 under the then Recruitment Rules Policy on priority basis before sending any other persons from departmental quota declared to be found qualified subsequently. (B)a writ of/or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to refrain from sending the candidates against 15% departmental quota on the basis of competitive test held in 1999 and in 2000 by relaxing the qualifying standards, for JTO training superseding the petitioners who have qualified themselves much earlier, thereby affecting their seniority in the cadre. (C)a writ of/or in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents not to give effect of further effect to Memo No. 12-15/2002/de dated 10. 3. 2003 issued by BSNL Department Examination Branch, through its joint Deputy Director General. (D)a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to take immediate steps to send the petitioners and others for JTO training for promotion within a specific time frame preferably within three months who have been declared qualified in 1996 for such training and promotion and the list published on 29. 4. 1998 as there are sufficient vacancies upon declaration that policy of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to give from the said list by yearly instalments is irrational against public policy and in violation of the right of the petitioners. (E)a writ of or in the nature of Certiorari commanding the respondents to certify and transmit all relevant records before this Hon'ble Court so that conscionable justice may be rendered to the parties.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the petitioners, Rules for Recruitment to the cadre of Junior Telecom Officer (hereinafter termed as J. T. O.) was framed by the issuance of Notification published in the Gazette. This can be said to be Recruitment Rules. The petitioners claimed that by the said Rules the J. T. O. s were to be recruited in respect of the existing vacancies of 65% against outsider quotas of vacancies and 35% against the departmental quotas of vacancies, provided the selected candidates undergo prescribed training as per training plan laid down and amended by the department from time to time.

( 4 ) THE petitioners stated that in so far as 65% vacancies against the outside quota was concerned the method of recruitment was through the competitive examination. In so far as the 35 vacancies against departmental candidates by way of promotion the method was through competitive examination/qualifying examination amongst departmental candidates having requisite qualifications and from the cadres working as Transmission Assistants, Telephone Inspectors, Auto Exchange Assistants, Wireless Operators and also by way of seniority-cum-fitness through separate qualifying test and the interse seniority was to be decided on the basis of length of service in the grade. According to the petitioners, the 35% vacancies against the departmental quota has been subdivided and distributed into three categories of departmental candidates, 15% + 10% + 10% and this was provided in the Recruitment Rules 1990. In so far as 15% out of 35% as mentioned in Column 12 under Part-1 (ii) of the Schedule Group-C employees in the department whose scale of pay was less than that of Junior Telecom Officer were elig






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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