Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJIV KHANNA, NAJMI WAZIRI, JJ.
MANOJ KASHYAP & ORS. - Petitioners
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 2620/2015
W.P.(C) 13/2015
Decided on : 30-05-2016
Recruitment Rules - Assistant Registrar - 1975 Rules - The court discussed the provisions of the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (Class-I and Class-II posts) Recruitment (Amendment) Rules, 1975 and the eligibility criteria for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar. The court highlighted the mandatory hierarchical system for promotion and the significance of the 'failing which' clause in the rules. The court emphasized that the extant rules must be followed and that any proposed amendments would only apply prospectively.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved two separate applications filed by Assistant Registrars and Senior Hindi Translators working at the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai and Allahabad respectively. The Assistant Registrars sought enforcement of appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar under the existing rules, while the Translators sought enforcement of the Departmental Promotional Committee (DPC) for consideration for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar. The court transferred the cases to the Principal Bench of the Tribunal and allowed the application filed by the Assistant Registrars, dismissing the one filed by the Translators.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the extant rules, namely the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (Class-I and Class-II posts) Recruitment (Amendment) Rules, 1975, mandated a hierarchical system for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar, and emphasized that the 'failing which' clause in the rules was significant. The court concluded that the official respondents had acted in an illegal manner by making ad-hoc appointments of ineligible candidates and directed the official respondents to consider the eligible Translators for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar by holding a DPC in accordance with the law.
Issues: The issues involved the enforcement of appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar under the existing rules, the delay in holding the DPC for promotion, and the ad-hoc appointments made by the official respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the extant rules must be followed, and any proposed amendments would only apply prospectively. It emphasized the significance of the 'failing which' clause in the rules, highlighting the mandatory hierarchical system for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar.
Final Decision: The court issued a writ of certiorari and set aside the direction of the Tribunal to the official respondents to first amend the rules and thereafter fill-up the posts of Assistant Registrars as per the amended rules. It also issued a writ of mandamus and directed the official respondents to consider the eligible Translators for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar by holding a DPC in accordance with the law. The court directed the official respondents to convene a regular DPC within six months from the date of receipt of the order.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
1. OA No.148/2014 was filed by Assistant Registrars working on ad-hoc basis in the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (ITAT, Mumbai), OA No.149/2014 was filed by Senior Hindi Translator working at ITAT, Allahabad. The grievance of the applicants in OA No.148/2014 was that by the letter under challenge dated 7th March, 2013 existing vacancies in the post of Assistant Registrar were being filled by way of promotion under the existing rules, namely, the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (Class-I and Class-II posts) Recruitment (Amendment) Rules, 1975 (“1975 Rules” for short). The applicants in OA No.148/2014 were originally appointed on the post of Lower Division Clerk and promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk/ Head Clerk/ Assistants and Superintendents. For convenience, we would in this appeal refer to them as UDCs.
2. To their contrary, the Hindi Translator/Senior Hindi Translators sought enforcement of appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar, as per the extant rules i.e. 1975 Rules and had filed OA No.149/2014 against the inordinate delay in holding the Departmental Promotional Committee (DPC for short) for consideration for promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar. For the sake of convenience the applicants in OA No.149/2014 have been referred to as Translators.
3. As the issues involved in OA No.148/2014 filed at Mumbai and OA No.149/2014 filed at Allahabad were connected and contradictory reliefs were sought, they were transferred to the Principal Bench of the Tribunal at New Delhi under Section 25 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
4. By the impugned common order dated 7.11.2014, OA No.148/2014 filed by the UDCs stands allowed and OA No.149/2014 filed by the Translators has been dismissed. The Tribunal has directed the Union of India and the President of ITAT, to ensure that the proposed amendments to the 1975 Rules, if not carried out already, were carried out as early as possible. Thereafter, the vacancies in the posts of Assistant Registrar would be filled in accordance with the amended Rules as expeditiously as possible. The President, ITAT would allow the UDCs to continue on ad hoc basis at the post of Assistant Registrar till the said posts were filled on regular basis in accordance with the amended Recruitment Rules.
5. The 1975 Rules were notified vide GSR 2326 dated 3rd July, 1975. They have been enacted in exercise of power conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution. The relevant portion of the said Rule relating to appointment / promotion to the post of Assistant Registrar reads as under:
| Name of post | No. of posts | Classification | Scale of pay | Whether selection post of non-selection post | Age limit for direct recruits | Educational and other qualifications required for direct recruits | Whether age and education qualification prescribed for direct recruits will apply in the case of promotees. |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| Assistant Registrar | 23 | General Central Services (II) Gazetted. | Rs.650-30-740-35-810, EB, - 40-1000-Eb-40-1200 | Selection | 40 years (Relaxable for Government Servant | Essential:- i) Degree in Law of recognized University or equivalent. ii) 3 years administrative experience in a responsible capacity in a government or Semi government organization or commercial concerned of repute. (Qualifications relaxable at commission's discretion in case of a candidate otherwise well qualified) Desirable Knowledge of government rules and regulations. | NO. |
| Period of probation if any | Method of Recruitment whether by direct recruitment or by promotion or by deputation, transfer and percentage of the vacancies to be filled by various methods. | In case of recruitment by promotion/deputation/transfer, grades f | ||
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
