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

2010 Supreme(Cal) 1017

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, Syamal Kanti Chakrabarti, JJ.
Swati Mukhopadhyay & Ors.
Vs
Kuntal Bose & Ors.
W. P. S. T. No. 428 of 2009 with C.A.N. 3260 of 2010
Decided On : 19.08.2010

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants/ Petitioners: Mr. Kashi Kanta Moitra, Mr. Murari Mohan Das, Ms. Pinku Goswami.
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharyya.
For the State : Dr. Sambuddha Chakraborty, Ms. Chhabi Chakraborty.
For Commission : Mr. Amalendu Mitra.

The eligibility criteria for promotion, as specified in the Recruitment Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution, prevail over general guidelines for promotion issued by the Finance Department.

Headnote:

JOINT BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER - PROMOTION - RECRUITMENT RULES - PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATIONS QUASHED.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners, promoted to Joint Block Development Officers (Jt. BDOs) from the feeder cadre of Inspector Progress and Evaluation (IPE), challenged the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal's order quashing the Public Service Commission's (PSC) recommendations for promotion from the IPE feeder post.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the PSC's consideration of past performance and seniority in the feeder cadre, as reflected in the Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), was not permissible under the Recruitment Rules, which specified merit and integrity as the sole eligibility criteria for promotion.

Issues: 1. Whether the PSC could consider past performance and seniority in the feeder cadre when selecting candidates for promotion to Jt. BDOs? 2. Whether the Recruitment Rules prevailed over the general guidelines for promotion issued by the Finance Department?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Recruitment Rules, framed under Article 309 of the Constitution, specified merit and integrity as the sole eligibility criteria for promotion to Jt. BDOs. 2. The PSC's consideration of past performance and seniority in the feeder cadre, as reflected in the ACRs, was not permissible under the Recruitment Rules, as it imported additional eligibility criteria not provided for in the rules. 3. The Recruitment Rules prevailed over the general guidelines for promotion issued by the Finance Department, as the guidelines could not override the express and unambiguous provisions of the rules.

Final Decision: The Court quashed the Tribunal's order and directed the PSC to prepare a fresh merit list based solely on the interview results and integrity certificates. The department was directed to issue fresh appointments and regularize existing appointments based on the PSC's revised recommendations, maintaining inter se seniority as per the existing feeder cadre.

JUDGMENT

SYAMAL KANTI CHAKRABARTI, J.

The present application is directed to assail the order dated 18.02.2009 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 3377 of 2007 whereby and wehreunder the Learned Tribunal has been pleased to struck down the recommendation of the Public Service Commission for promotion to the post of Joint Block Development Officers containing memo no. III/T27 PSC/1 P-95/04 dated 17.04.2007 so far as it relates to the feeder post being Inspector Progress and Evaluation under Panchayat and Rural Development Department is concerned.

2. The petitioners contend that they are all working as Joint Block Development Officers on promotion from the feeder cadre of Inspector Progress and Evaluation on the basis of recommendation of the State Public Service Commission and now joined their promotional post in terms of order of the Panchayat and Rural Development Department being notification no. 5132-RD(JT BDO)/IB-2/2004 dated 12.07.2007. It is their further submission that the promotion to the post of Jt. BDO is conducted and regulated by relevant recruitment rules containing the notification dated 23.02.1983 through Public Service Commission from out of the candidates recommended from 5 feeder posts namely, a) Extension Officer of Panchayat; b) Extension Officer Social Education (redesignated as ‘Extension Officer mass Education’); c) instructor of Gram Sevak Training Centre under Agricultural Department; d) Accountant cum Head Clerk in the office of BDO under Panchayat and Community Development Department and e) Inspector Progress and Evaluation (I.P.E.) under Panchayat and Rural Development Department. The eligibility criteria for such selection as prescribed in the said notification dated 23.02.1983 provide that 60 per cent of such appointment on promotion will be made from the aforesaid 5 feeder posts and 40 per cent by direct recruitment and that the minimum service from the feeder post on first day of the year of recruitment was prescribed as 6 years of service and selection shall be made on the basis of an interview and having certificate about the integrity of the candidate concerned and such interview shall be conducted by the Public Service Commission. In the instant case all the aforesaid departments supplied the names of all eligible candidates who fulfil the above criteria. According to them seniority in the respective feeder cadre have no manner of application in the matter of such promotion excepting in case where the candidates have got some marks in the selection test where inter se seniority will be treated as a criterion to place them in order of merit in the select list for promotion to the post of Jt. BDO But the Learned Tribunal has come to a finding that without gradation list being prepared by the respective feeder posts, promotion cannot be regulated and seniority is to be taken into account for the purpose of such promotion and hence the selection so far as I.P.E. is concerned made by the Public Service Commission was set aside without affecting the selection of 4 other cadres whose selection also suffered from same infirmity on the ground that such other cadres did not appear before the Learned Tribunal seeking any such redress. It is their further submission that seniority in the feeder cadre has no role to play for such promotion excepting the eligibility criteria which was fixed as 6 years service in the feeder post. At the time of forwarding the names of eligible candidates from the feeder post by the 5 departments the date of joining in the present post, date of entry in the government service etc. were all forwarded to the Public Service Commission and as per settled law those could be taken into consideration when identical marks were awarded to several candidates while their date of joining in the feeder post is to be taken into account. The Public Service Commission has made their recommendation strictly on the basis of merit of the candidates of 5 feeder post






































































































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