Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Tushar Rao Gedela, JJ.
Sarwan Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan - Respondent
W.P.(C) 11384 of 2019 and CM Appl. 50282 of 2022
Decided On : 22-11-2022
Promotion rules allow juniors in one subject to bypass seniors in another where vacancies exist, maintaining equality without error in application by the Respondent.
Headnote:(A) KVS (Appointment, Promotion, Seniority, etc.) Rules, 1971 - Petitioner sought appointment as PGT, claiming eligibility as a senior TGT - Tribunal noted that promotion rules allow juniors to bypass seniors in different subject cadres - Tribunal dismissed the petition for lack of comparability between TGT (Maths) and TGT (Science) (Paras 10, 12, 14).
(B) Recruitment Rules - Not permitting promotion to PGT (Maths) due to unavailability of posts while juniors in another subject cadre qualified (Para 14).
Facts of the case:
The Petitioner claimed to have been wrongly denied promotion to PGT, arguing eligibility based on seniority and appointment years (Paras 10, 11).
Findings of Court:
The Court upheld the Tribunal's ruling, stating Respondent's adherence to recruitment rules was justified, and the petitioner was not comparably positioned to promote (Paras 15, 16).
Issues: Were the petitioner’s claims valid for promotion under the existing recruitment guidelines?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court reasoned that recruitment rules permit the bypassing of senior TGTs in one subject for junior TGTs in another where posts are unavailable, maintaining necessary role equality (Para 14).
Result: Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application to participate in vice principal exam (Para 5 , 6) |
| 2. comparison of candidates from different streams (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. recruitment rules and promotions based on seniority (Para 13 , 14) |
| 4. dismissal of the petition and interim application (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 49925/2022 and CM APPL. 49981/2022 (early hearing)
1. Issue notice.
2. Notice is accepted by learned counsel for the Respondents.
3. For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed.
4. Petition is taken up for disposal today. Next date of 02.05.2023 stands cancelled.
W.P.(C) 11384/2019 and CM APPL. 50282/2022
5. By ad interim application (CM No.50282/2022), Petitioner seeks a direction to the Respondent to permit him to participate in the Limited Departmental Competition Examination for the post of Vice Principal. It is contended by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the eligibility criteria for the post of Vice Principal is 5 years as a Post Graduate Teacher (PGT). He submits that in case the petition of the Petitioner succeeds then Petitioner would be deemed to be Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) with effect from 1999 when his juniors were promoted and as such would have the qualifying service for the post of Vice Principal.
6. With the consent of the parties, we have taken up the writ petition for final disposal today. Accordingly, the fate of this application would be dependent upon the result of the writ petition.
7. Petitioner had filed the subject Original Application seeking appointment to the post of PGT in the Respondent Organization.
8. Petitioner joined the Respondent as a Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) (Maths). The appointment order specifies that Petitioner has been appointed as TGT (PCM).
9. It is the case of the Respondent that TGT (PCM) is synonymous to TGT (Maths) and the other post in issue is TGT (Science) in which a person has to be a Graduate in Zoology, Botany and Chemistry.
10. Petitioner filed the subject Original Application contending that he had been appointed in the year 1996 and his juniors who had been appointed as TGT in 1997 have been promoted to the post of PGT.
11. Tribunal in the impugned order has noticed that the feeder cadre for the post of PGT is TGT (Maths) and TGT (Science) and since the feeder cadre is TGT (Maths) and TGT (Science), equality needs to be maintained in drawing the candidates from both sources. The Tribunal has noticed that the last candidate drawn from TGT (Maths) (Petitioner's feeder post) was at Serial No.1851 in the seniority list whereas Petitioner is at Serial No.1860, in contrast candidate drawn from TGT (Science) occur at Serial Nos.1812, 1813 and 1815 in the seniority list.
12. The Tribunal has noticed that there can be no comparison between the applicants from the Maths stream and the Science stream. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.
13. Reference may also be had to the relevant Recruitment Rules for the post of PGT. Para 11 of the KVS (Appointment, Promotion, Seniority, etc.) Rules, 1971 as amended upto 01.08.2008 which are the relevant Rules, in para 11 refer to the cases of recruitment/promotion by deputation, transfer, etc. to the post of PGT. Apart from specifying the feeder cadres, the Recruitment Rules stipulate as under:
"...In case vacancies are not available in a particular subject cadre at the PGT level for which a senior TGT is eligible, a TGT who may be junior in the same feeder cadre may be promoted without promotion of the senior if vacancies are available in a different subject cadre at the PGT level if the junior is eligible for it..."
14. Perusal of the Recruitment Rules show that recruitment to the post of PGT (Science) and PGT (Maths) is as per their separate seniority list which has to be maintained at that level. The Rules provide that if no vacancy is available in a particular subject cadre at PGT level and is available in a different subject cadre th
