1985 Supreme(Raj) 820
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
S.C.Agrawal, J.
Manohar Nagora - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and others - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1467 of 1983.
Decided On : 30-11-1985
The eligibility criteria for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Archives under Rule 24A(2) of the Rajasthan Archives Service Rules, 1975, must be satisfied by the petitioner as on 1st April of the year of selection.
Headnote:
RAJASTHAN ARCHIVES SERVICE RULES, 1975 - RULE 24A(2) - PROMOTION - ELIGIBILITY - VACANCY - DETERMINATION - YEAR OF SELECTION - RULE 9(1)(A) - CLARIFICATION CIRCULAR DATED 18TH FEBRUARY, 1984 - APPLICABILITY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a member of the Scheduled Caste, was appointed as an Archivist in 1977 and was confirmed in the post in 1982. In 1982, an additional post of Assistant Director of Archives was created. The petitioner, who had completed 5 years of service as an Archivist in July 1982, claimed that he was eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Archives, which was reserved for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes candidates. However, the respondents denied his eligibility on the ground that he did not have the requisite experience of 5 years as an Archivist on 1st April, 1982, as required under Rule 24A(2) of the Rajasthan Archives Service Rules, 1975.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the additional post of Assistant Director of Archives created in 1982 was a vacancy occurring in the year 1982-83 and that promotions on the said post had to be made from amongst persons who were eligible for promotion in terms of sub-rule (2) of rule 24A of the Rules. The court further held that the petitioner could not be considered eligible for that post because on 1st April, 1982, he did not possess the requisite experience of five years on the post of Archivist.
Issues: 1. Whether the additional post of Assistant Director of Archives created in 1982 was a vacancy occurring in the year 1982-83? 2. Whether the petitioner was eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Archives? 3. Whether the proviso to sub-rule (5) of rule 24A of the Rajasthan Archives Service Rules, 1975, was applicable to the present case?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the additional post of Assistant Director of Archives created in 1982 was a vacancy occurring in the year 1982-83 because it was included in the budget proposals for the Archives Department which was submitted in the State Legislative Assembly on 3rd March, 1982 and was approved by the State Legislative Assembly on 20th March, 1982. 2. The court held that the petitioner was not eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Archives because he did not possess the requisite experience of five years on the post of Archivist on 1st April, 1982, as required under Rule 24A(2) of the Rajasthan Archives Service Rules, 1975. 3. The court held that the proviso to sub-rule (5) of rule 24A of the Rajasthan Archives Service Rules, 1975, was not applicable to the present case because it relates to promotion from the lowest post or category of post in the State Service to the next higher post or category of post in the State Service and selection for promotion for all posts in the Subordinate service and in the ministerial services, and the present case was concerned with promotion from the post of Archivist to the post of Asstt. Director of Archives, which is a post in the State Service.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
1. - Shri Manohar Nagora, the petitioner in this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is by caste a Khatik which is a Scheduled Caste in Rajasthan. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Archivist, by order dated 12th July, 1977 after regular selection by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. This post of Archivist is now designated as Puralekh Adhikari. The petitioner was confirmed on the said post of Archivist by order dated 4th Oct, 1982 The next post higher to that of Archivist is that of Asstt. Director of Archives. The post of Asstt. Director of Archives forms part of the Rajasthan Archives Service. The recruitment to the posts in and conditions of service of persons appointed to the Rajasthan Archives Service is regulated by the Rajasthan Archives Service Rules, 1975 (hereinafter, referred to as the Rules'). Under (he Schedule lo the Rules, recruitment on the post of Asstt. Director, Archives is to be made 100% by promotion from amongst Archivist/Research Officers. The qualifications and experience prescribed under the Rules for such promotion is M. A. IInd Class in History or Sanskrit or Philosophy and experience of 5 years on the post of Archivist or Research Officer after regular selection. Originally there were two posts of Assist. Director of Archives. By order (Annexure 4) dated 29th Sept. 1982, on temporary post of Asstt. Director of Archives was created upto 28th Feb. 1983 from the date, the said post was filled in. The case of the petitioner is that the additional post of Asstt. Director of, Archives was required to be filled from amongst Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes as per roster prescribed under Article 16(4) of the Constitution. The case of the petitioner is further that on 29th Sept. 1982, the date on which this additional post of Asstt. Director, Archives was created, the petitioner had completed 5 years service as Archivist and he possessed the requisite qualifications and experience for promotion on the post of Asstt. Director of Archives. The petitioner has stated that for extraneous reasons his name was omitted for being considered for the purpose promotion to the post of Asstt. Director of Archives and that one Dr. Gyan Chand Sharma, respondent No 4, who is not a member of Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe was being considered and was likely to be given promotion on the said post. The petitioner has, therefore, filed this writ petition wherein he was prayed that respondent Nos. 1 and 2. namely the State of Rajasthan and the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) be directed to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post reserved for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes and that in case the DPC meets, and without considering the case of the petitioner recommends any person for such an appointment be quashed.
2. The writ petition has been contested by the respondents. A reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 3 and another reply has been filed by respondent No.4. In the reply that has been filed on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 3, it has been stated that the post of Asstt. Director of Archives which was created vide order dated 29th Sept. 1982 is a vacancy for the year 1982-83 and the petitioner is not eligible for promotion on the said post under the Rules, because the petitioner did not have the requisite experience of five years as Archivist on 1st April, 1982. In the said reply it has also been stated that the newly created post of Asstt. Director of Archives is to be filled in from amongst the members of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes provided such a candidate fulfils the requisite qualifications and experience as laid down in the Rules, as amended and since the petitioner did not fulfil the requisite experience of 5 years as Archivist as on 1st April, 1982, his case does not fall within the eligibility one. In the said reply it has been stated that the case of the petitioner was considered, but since he failed
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
