Back
2015 Supreme(Mad) 1342
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI & M. VENUGOPAL, JJ.
The Chairman & Managing Director, National Insurance Company Ltd. & Another – Appellant
\Vs.
A. Sundaram – Respondent
W.A.No. 795 of 2014
Decided On : 16-03-2015
For the Appellants:V. Karthic for M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co., Advocates.
For the Respondent:V. Bharathidasan, Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that promotion to the post of Record Clerk is based on seniority, qualification, and work record-confidential report, as per Clause 25 of the Promotion Policy for Officers, and that relief displacing other officers/employees cannot be granted without impleading them and affording them an opportunity of hearing.
Headnote:
Promotion - Record Clerk - Clause 25 of the Promotion Policy for Officers - 40% seniority, 30% qualification, 30% work record-confidential report - Conversion of Scheduled Tribe vacancy to Scheduled Caste category - Promotion based on departmental test and selection criteria
Fact of the Case:
The respondent sought promotion as Record Clerk after passing the departmental test but was not promoted for several years. The Writ Court directed the appellants to promote the respondent notionally to the post of Record Clerk with effect from 1994 in the Scheduled Tribe vacancy, which remained vacant since 1992.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the respondent's request for promotion was satisfied in 1998, and the subsequent representation in 2007 sought seniority for further promotion, not promotion from 1992 or 1994. The Court also held that the conversion of the Scheduled Tribe vacancy to the Scheduled Caste category before 1998 was not feasible. The Court rejected the contention that the respondent's juniors were wrongly promoted before him and emphasized the importance of impleading other officers/employees in such cases.
Issues: The issues revolved around the respondent's delayed promotion, the conversion of vacancies between Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories, and the promotion criteria based on the departmental test and selection criteria.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the satisfaction of the respondent's promotion request in 1998, the infeasibility of converting the vacancy before 1998, and the rejection of the contention regarding the promotion of the respondent's juniors. The Court also emphasized the necessity of impleading other officers/employees in cases seeking relief displacing them.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, the writ petition was dismissed, and the writ appeal was allowed.
1. The instant appeal arises from the order dated 18.03.2014 passed in W.P. No.25951 of 2010, which was filed by the respondent herein.
2. For the sake of brevity, clarity and convenience, the parties are referred to as per their arraignment in the instant appeal.
3. The facts as projected by the respondent are that he was initially appointed as a Sub-Staff on 26.06.1986 in the Divisional Office of the appellant Insurance Company at Salem. The next avenue of promotion is to the post of Record Clerk. The Sub-Staff has to pass the departmental test for being eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Record Clerk. The respondent, admittedly, appeared in the departmental test successfully for promotion to the cadre of Record Clerk, held on 7th and 8th June 1990, as is evident from the notice dated 08.06.1990 of the appellants. Despite passing the departmental test, the respondent was not promoted as Record Clerk, when, according to him, a number of juniors in the lower post were promoted in the year 1991. The respondent was ultimately promoted on 05.10.1998, after more than 5 of his juniors were promoted as Record Clerk. The respondent submitted a representation on 08.07.1991 to the Branch Secretary, Tamil Nadu General Insurance Employees Union, Salem, for promoting him to the post of Record Clerk. It transpires that on 01.06.1994, the Senior Divisional Manager wrote to M.R.O. Madras, requesting to examine the case of the respondent being an eligible candidate for promotion against a RC vacancy at Sankagiri. The respondent was granted thereafter promotion on 05.10.1998. The respondent, again, made a representation dated 09.05.1997, signed on 09.05.1999, to consider his case for promotion as Record Clerk. The respondent again kept quiet and made one more representation on 30.03.2007 to consider his 8 years of service for the next grade promotion, as he cleared the departmental examination in 1990, but, was not promoted for about 8 years. Thus, the said seniority be granted to him for consideration to the next grade promotion.
4. It appears that the respondent has come up with a writ petition being W.P. No.13383 of 2009 earlier, seeking a direction to the appellants to grant notional promotion to the post of Record Clerk from the date his juniors were promoted, along with consequential seniority in the post of Assistant, with all monetary benefits.
5. A learned Single Judge of this Court disposed of the said writ petition on 16.07.2009, directing the appellants to consider the respondent's representations dated 08.07.1991, 09.05.1997 and 30.03.2007, which resulted in passing of the order dated 03.02.2010 by the second appellant, whereunder, the said representations were rejected. Thus, the instant writ petition.
6. Before the Writ Court, the appellants filed a counter affidavit stating that the promotion to the cadre of Record Clerk, Class III category, is considered centrewise. The centre is controlled by a particular division. The employees are entitled to be considered against the general category vacancy or the reserved category vacancy, depending on their status. An employee would be eligible to be considered for a vacancy that arises in his centre alone and not in any other centre. Finally, ranking of the selected employees is prepared after adding the average of marks in Confidential Report. The promotion to the post of Record Clerk is based on seniority (40%), qualification (30%) and work record-confidential report (30%). The qualification envisages grant of 30 marks for passing Secondary School Certificate or High School with English/Hindi as a subject, 20 marks for passing SSC without Hindi/English as a subject and 10 marks to those who passed VIII standard.
7. According to the appellants, the vacancy position in the Salem Centre from 1991 to 1998 for the post of Record Clerk is as follows:
S.No. Ranking List Vacancy Position Remarks
1 28.06.1991 General - 7SC-1ST - 1 The name of the petitioner appear
