IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
NIROOP RAJ K.P. S/O LATE K.V. PURUSHAN – Petitioner
Versus
COCHIN PORT TRUST – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 11192 of 2021
Decided On : 08-12-2022
Appointed as Shed Clerk - Dying in harness Scheme - Petitioner was appointed as Shed Clerk which is a Class III post in Wharf establishment under first respondent by Exhibit P1 order dated - Appointment of petitioner was under dying in harness Scheme and order specifically states that he will be on probation for a period of two years from his appointment and that he should produce enclosed declaration form with regard to his marital status duly signed at the time of joining duty - Petitioner joined duty pursuant to Exhibit P1 - His probation was declared - Thereafter by Exhibit P2 order, he was promoted as Shed Writer with effect - By Exhibit P3 dated ,petitioner was promoted as Tally Supervisor on regular basis with effect in an existing vacancy - Thereafter, he was promoted as Shed Foreman on regular basis in an existing vacancy with effect from 21-07-2018 by Exhibit P4 order and as Assistant Wharf Superintendent with effect from 21-07-2020 by Exhibit P5 order - Whether petitioner ought to have acquired qualification of graduation before promotion to next post or whether such insistence can be made only when such promotion is made to next “cadre” - It is clear that respondents themselves have specifically considered posts in Class I as forming a separate cadre of posts - If that is meaning given to word “cadre” by respondents in their Recruitment Rules, then contention of petitioner that he has to acquire qualification of graduation only at time of promotion to next cadre, i.e. cadre of posts in Class II, would be a completely acceptable proposition - This is obviously reason why petitioner had been granted successive promotions by respondents without insisting on acquisition of qualification of graduation.
Findings of the Court:
In the above factual situation, I am of opinion that question as to date of issuance of the amendment and applicability of the amendment does not require a consideration, since only question which needs to be decided is whether the obligation to acquire the qualification of graduation arises only at the time of promotion to the next cadre - As a matter of fact, schedule to the Cochin Port Trust Employees (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Regulations, 2010, which is produced as Ext.R1(d) along with counter affidavit of respondents 1 and 2, specifically refers to Recruitment Rules of 70 categories of Class-1 cadre Court of opinion that the rejection of petitioner's contention by Exhibit P9 that he has to acquire qualification of graduation only when he is promoted to a post in the next cadre, was completely untenable - Exhibit P9 is, therefore, found to be unsustainable - Same is set aside - There will be a direction to respondents to permit petitioner to continue in service as Assistant Wharf Superintendent and grant him all consequential benefits.
Result: Writ Petition is ordered accordingly.
JUDGMENT :
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
1. This writ petition is filed challenging Exhibit P9 order by which the promotions granted to the petitioner to the posts of Shed Writer, Tally Supervisor, Shed Foreman and Assistant Wharf Superintendent were cancelled and the petitioner was directed to be reverted to the post of Shed Clerk. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Shed Clerk which is a Class III post in the Wharf establishment under the first respondent by Exhibit P1 order dated 20-07-2011. The appointment of the petitioner was under the dying in harness Scheme and the order specifically states that he will be on probation for a period of two years from his appointment and that he should produce the enclosed declaration form with regard to his marital status duly signed at the time of joining duty. The petitioner joined duty pursuant to Exhibit P1. His probation was declared. Thereafter by Exhibit P2 order, he was promoted as Shed Writer with effect from 21-07-2014. By Exhibit P3 dated 30-06-2016, the petitioner was promoted as Tally Supervisor on regular basis with effect from 21-07-2016 in an existing vacancy. Thereafter, he was promoted as Shed Foreman on regular basis in an existing vacancy with effect from 21-07-2018 by Exhibit P4 order and as Assistant Wharf Superintendent with effect from 21-07-2020 by Exhibit P5 order.
2. It is submitted that as per Exhibit P6, Cochin Port Trust Employees (Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion) Amendment Regulations 2015, a minimum educational qualification of graduation is prescribed for appointment to the post of Shed Clerk under the Traffic Department. The regulation provides that the dependents of employees in service as on 26-09-1998 and those who died in harness/invalidated will be exempted from the purview of change in qualification of graduation. However, these dependents, when employed, would be required to acquire graduation before promotion to the next cadre and an undertaking to that effect should be obtained from them and this should be specifically mentioned in the appointment order. It is submitted that presumably because the amendments were notified only as per Exhibit P6 on 22nd March 2016, and the petitioner was appointed long before the said date, the petitioner was never informed that he did not have the prescribed qualification for the post or that he would have to acquire the said qualification for promotion to the next cadre as is evident from Exhibit P1 appointment order.
3. The petitioner’s probation was declared and he was duly promoted to the higher posts on a regular basis. However, Exhibit P7 notice was issued, informing the petitioner that he was exempted from acquiring the qualification of graduation for his initial appointment, but he had to acquire graduation before the next promotion and therefore the promotions granted to him to the posts of Shed Writer, Tally Supervisor, Shed Foreman and Assistant Wharf Superintendent were illegal and liable to be recalled. The petitioner submitted Exhibit P8 reply stating that he was never informed of any necessity to acquire the qualification of graduation and that since the qualification was prescribed only by Exhibit P6 amendment, which was notified on 22-03-2016, the petitioner stood exempted from the requirement as he had already been promoted to the higher post as on the date of the amendment of the Rules. It is further contended that even if the facts stated in Exhibit P7 are accepted in toto, the employee would have to acquire the qualification only at the time of promotion to the next cadre and since all the posts to which the petitioner had been granted promotions were Class III posts included in the clerical cadre, he would be required to acquire the qualification only when he aspires for promotion to the supervisory cadre i.e. Class II posts. The said objection of the petitioner was considered and Exhibit P9 order was passed stating as follows:
High Court of Kerala and Another vs. Mohandas P.K. and Others
Unreserved Employees Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others
‘Cadre’ is a designated group of officers who are grouped together. Cadre means strength of a service or part of a service sanctioned as an independent unit. It may have posts of different grades
merely because another reasonable view may be possible, is no ground for this Court sitting in judicial review and judicial superintendence to upturn the impugned verdict of the Tribunal which is a c....
Fixing eligibility for a particular post or even for admission to a course falls within exclusive domain of legislature/executive and cannot be subject matter of judicial review.
The court established that the petitioner, as the only case of ineligibility due to subsequent amendment of the Rules, constituted a class in herself and was entitled to be considered for relaxation ....
The court upheld the validity of amended promotion rules, ruling they apply prospectively and that participation in the selection process waives the right to challenge it.
The amendment mandating a Bachelor's Degree for certain promotions was constitutionally valid, emphasizing the employer's prerogative to set qualification standards related to job responsibilities.
when a new post is created, the concept of Rules obtaining when the vacancies arose is inappiicable as what is created is a new post on account of re-structuring of the cadre.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.