Back
2015 Supreme(Mad) 1440
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN & P.R. SHIVAKUMAR, JJ.
Sanchar Nigam Association of Telecom Technical Assistants, rep. by its President & Others - Appellants
Versus
The Union of India rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited & Others - Respondents
W.P.Nos. 15509, 20660 & 22162 of 2014 & All Connected Pending Mps
Decided On : 26-03-2015
For the Petitioners:AR.L. Sundaresan for M/s.AL. Gandhimathi, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R1 & R2, N. Ramesh, CGSC, S. Vijay Narayan, S.C, G.B. Saravanabhavan, R4 & R5, C.K. Chandrasekar, R6 & R7, S. Vinothsathiyalazer, Advocates, R2 & R3, M. Vaidyanathan, Standing Counsel.
Headnote:
Telecom Technical Assistants - Promotion Rules - 1996, 1999, 2001 - The court discussed the rules and regulations governing the promotion of Telecom Technical Assistants to Junior Telecom Officers, highlighting the changes in the rules over the years and the failure of the Department to conduct competitive examinations as prescribed by the rules. The court also considered the impact of the formation of BSNL and the agreements reached between the Management and the trade unions on the employees' terms and conditions of service.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved Telecom Technical Assistants seeking promotion to Junior Telecom Officers and the failure of the Department to conduct competitive examinations as prescribed by the rules. The employees were given officiating promotions for a prolonged period, and the Management proposed to conduct a competitive examination, leading to the filing of writ petitions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Department had failed to conduct competitive examinations as prescribed by the rules, and the employees had been given officiating promotions for a prolonged period. The court also noted the agreements reached between the Management and the trade unions, which impacted the employees' terms and conditions of service.
Issues: The issues included the failure of the Department to conduct competitive examinations as prescribed by the rules, the employees' prolonged officiating promotions, and the impact of the agreements between the Management and the trade unions on the employees' terms and conditions of service.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Department's failure to conduct competitive examinations as prescribed by the rules and the prolonged officiating promotions warranted relief for the employees. The court also considered the impact of the agreements between the Management and the trade unions on the employees' terms and conditions of service.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, finding no illegality in the view taken by the Tribunal and concluding that the employees deserved relief due to the Department's failure to conduct competitive examinations and the impact of the agreements between the Management and the trade unions on the employees' terms and conditions of service.
V. Ramasubramanian, J
1. These writ petitions arise out of a common order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai, in a batch of Original Applications filed by persons holding the substantive posts of Telecom Technical Assistants (TTA) (hereinafter called the TTAs), but who are officiating in the post of Junior Telecom Officers (hereinafter called the JTOs).
2. We have heard Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Association of Telecom Technical Assistants of the Tamil Nadu Circle, Mr.N.Ramesh, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the Union of India, Mr.M.Vaidyanathan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the BSNL and Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents, who were applicants before the Tribunal.
3. What was once the Department of Telecommunications, was split and a Public Sector Undertaking by name Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (hereinafter called the BSNL) was created from out of the said department with effect from 1.10.2000. Persons, who were employees of the Department of Telecommunications, were given the option to join the newly created company, subject to certain terms and conditions.
4. Before the creation of the BSNL, the Department of Telecommunications had several categories of employees, who were classified into four groups namely Groups-A, B, C and D. While posts in Group-A and B were executive posts, the posts in Group-C and D were non-executive posts. The post of Junior Telecom Officer was a Non-Gazetted Non-Ministerial Group-C post and the recruitment to the said post was earlier governed by a set of rules known as Junior Telecom Officers Recruitment Rules, 1996, published on 8.2.1996 in the Gazette of India. These Rules were issued in exercise of the powers conferred by the Proviso to Article 309 of The Constitution.
5. As per the Schedule to those 1996 Rules, recruitment to the post of JTOs was both by the method of direct recruitment as well as by the method of promotion/transfer. 50% of the posts were to be filled up by way of direct recruitment and we are not concerned with the same.
6. As per the 1996 Rules, promotion/transfer of departmental candidates under the 50% quota for recruitment to the post of JTOs was regulated as follows:-
(a) 15% by promotion of departmental candidates through a limited departmental competitive examination; and
(b) 35% by promotion/transfer of Transmission Assistants/Wireless Operators/Auto Exchange Assistants/Phone Inspectors/Telecom Technical Assistants.
7. In other words, 50% quota reserved for departmental candidates was to be filled up partly by conducting a limited departmental competitive examination and partly by way of promotion, after undergoing a screening test.
8. The 1996 Rules were repealed and new set of rules known as Junior Telecom Officers Recruitment Rules, 1999 were issued and published in the Gazette of India on 31.8.1999. They came into effect on 1.9.1999.
9. Under the 1999 Rules, 50% of the posts of JTOs had to be filled up by way of direct recruitment and 50% had to be filled up by way of promotion. Out of the quota intended for promotion, 35% was to be filled up through a limited departmental competitive examination from amongst certain categories of Group-C employees possessing certain qualifications such as Bachelors Degree in Engineering or Science or a three year Diploma in certain branches of Engineering with 10 years of regular service. The remaining 15% was to be filled up through a limited departmental competitive examination from amongst certain other categories of Group-C employees possessing a different set of qualifications such as Higher Secondary Course, a three year Diploma in Engineering and 10 years of service.
10. In other words, the most important amendment made in the 1999 Rules was to introduce a departmental competitiv
