2001 Supreme(Raj) 1633
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
J.C.Verma, J.
Jagdish Prashad Chandelia - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 819 of 1990.
Decided On : 18-05-2001
The main legal point established in the judgment is that executive instructions and retrospective amendments affecting vested rights are unreasonable, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional provisions.
Headnote:
RAS - Rajasthan Administrative Service - Rule 28-B (11-A), Rule 8, Rule 9, Rule 11, Rule 11-A, Rule 32 - The judgment discusses the petitioner's appointment and promotions in the Rajasthan Administrative Service, focusing on the rules and criteria for promotion, reservation of vacancies, and the determination of vacancies yearwise. The court's decision is influenced by the interpretation of these rules, particularly Rule 11-A, and the retrospective amendments made to the rules.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was appointed in the Rajasthan Administrative Service and subsequently promoted. However, certain promotions and amendments in the rules affected the petitioner's eligibility for consideration for further promotions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the executive instructions and retrospective amendments affecting the petitioner's right to consideration for promotion were arbitrary and violative of the Constitution of India.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's eligibility for promotion, the impact of executive instructions and retrospective amendments on the petitioner's rights, and the violation of constitutional provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the executive instructions and retrospective amendments, which affected the petitioner's vested rights, were unreasonable, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional provisions.
Final Decision: The court quashed the executive instructions and the retrospective amendment, granting the petitioner the right to be considered for super-time scale under the existing rules, and provided consequential reliefs.
JUDGMENT
1. - The petitioner was appointed in the Rajasthan Administrative Service (here-in-after called RAS) on 17.10.1974 vide Annexure-1 as having been selected by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. He was promoted to the senior scale on urgent temporary basis on 29.2.1979, but later on the recommendations of the selection committee, was put on senior scale vide letter dated 11.10.1984 (Annexure-2) against the quota of 1980 and again promoted to the post of selection scale on urgent temporary basis vide order Annexure-3 dated 7.2.1987. Because of the reason that certain other persons had been promoted to the selection scale regularly vide order dated 6.12.1986, but the petitioner was not considered and, therefore, being aggrieved the petitioner filed an appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Service Appellate Tribunal which appeal was decided on 22.7.1987 and a direction was given to the respondent to convene a meeting of the DPC for promotion of the petitioner to selection scale relating to the year 1983-84 and on the basis of that judgment, the petitioner was substantively promoted to the selection scale against the quota of 1983-84 vide Annexure-4, meaning thereby, that he was deemed to have been promoted on the selection scale on 1.4.1983 regularly in view of Rule 28-B (11-A) of the Rajasthan Administrative Service Rules, 1954. Rule 8 provides for reservation of vacancies for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Rule 9 lays down that there shall be determination of vacancies yearwise. Rule 28-B deals with revised criteria, eligibility and procedure for promotion to Junior, Senior and other posts encadred in the service.
2. Rule 28-B provides that as soon as the appointing authority determines the number of vacancies under Rule 9 and decides that a certain number of posts are required to be filled in by promotion, it shall, prepare a correct and complete list of senior most persons who are eligible and qualified under the rules and on the basis of seniority-cum-merit or on the basis of merit to class of post concerned and only those persons who are included in the list are to be considered. Only confirmed persons on the lowest post of service were to be considered. It was further mentioned that first post for promotion in the service is to be made on the basis of seniority cum merit and second promotional post is to be filled up on the basis of merit in the proportion of 50:50. For one vacancy five eligible persons were to be considered; for two vacancies eight eligible persons were to be considered, for three vacancies ten eligible persons were to be considered and for four or more vacancies, three times the number of vacancies are to be put in zone of consideration.
3. Rule 11(a) provides that the committee shall consider the cases of all senior most persons who are eligible and qualified for promotion to the class of posts concerned and shall prepare a list containing names of the persons found suitable. Sub-rule (b) of Rule 11 provides that the committee shall also prepare a separate list on the basis of seniority cum merit and/or on the basis of merit as the case may be, as per the criteria for promotion laid down in these rules.
4. Rule 11-A provides that if in any subsequent year, after promulgation of these Rules, vacancies relating to any earlier year are determined under Sub-rule (2) of rule relating to determination of vacancies which were required to be filled by promotion, the DPC shall consider cases of all such persons who would have been eligible in the year to which the vacancies relate irrespective of the year in which the meeting of the DPC is held and such promotions shall be governed by the criteria and procedure for promotion as was applicable in a particular year.
5. Vide Annexure-5, an amendment in Rule 32 was made on 17.7.1987 wherein for the existing expression 'senior scale and selection grade post' occurring in between the words 'laid down in Rule 9, appointment to' and "shall be made b
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
