Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(Del) 18940
DELHI HIGH COURT
NIRMALA VINCENT – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – Respondent
W.P.(C)-2742/2021
Key Points: - Petition challenges the condition at Serial No. 9 in Schedule I of the NCLT Recruitment Rules 2020 requiring a law degree for promotion to Court Officer; seeks quashing or relaxation. (!) (!) (!) - Court held that the remedy involves consideration for relaxation under Rule 16 and references UPSC guidelines; declined to grant main relief but directed consideration for relaxation within four weeks. (!) (!) (!) (!) - Supreme Court/High Court discussion reiterates that rules governing promotions are policy/administrative and may be relaxed for specific cases; acknowledges the petitioner’s unique position as a single affected employee and directs case-by-case relaxation consideration. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - The impugned rule makes law degree mandatory for promotion via promotion path, while deputation/absorption allows non-law degree (subject to "preferable"). (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - The court invokes P.U. Joshi and Ram Krishna Dalmia principles to permit relaxation in exceptional circumstances; orders retention/consideration consistent with Article 14 and UPSC guidelines. (!) (!) (!) - The petitioner’s case is directed to be considered for one-time relaxation within four weeks; if granted, retrospective appointment from date of ineligibility could be provided. (!) (!) (!) - The decision discusses that recruitment rules are policy decisions within executive discretion and not a judicial mandate to alter rules for all employees; emphasizes classification and rational basis for promotion/deputation. (!) (!) (!) - The Order is disposed with directions for relaxation consideration and possible retrospective appointment. (!) (!) (!)
Question 1?
Question 2?
Question 3?
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Judgment reserved on: 09.01.2023
Judgment delivered on: 03.07.2023
+
W.P. (C) 2742/2021 & CM APPL. 20040/2021
NIRMALA VINCENT
……Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
...... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner:
Mr P. Nagesh, Senior Advocate with Mr Akshay Sharma,
Mr Shivam Wadhwa and Mr Suhas, Advocates.
For the Respondent
Mr Mukul Singh, Central Government Standing Counsel
with Ms Ira Singh and Mr. Aditya Bhanu Neekhra,
Advocates
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR JUSTICESANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
1.
Petitioner impugns condition at Serial No. 9 in Schedule I of the
National Company Law Tribunal (Recruitment, Salary and other Terms
and Conditions of Service of Officers and other Employees) Rules,
Digitally Signed
By:RASHIM KAPOOR
Signing Date:03.07.2023
15:50:29
Signature Not Verified
2020 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), issued by Respondent No.1,
to the extent that they prescribe a degree in law as a qualification for an
Assistant to be promoted to the post of Court Officer in Respondent No.
3, National Company Law Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the
NCLT).
2.
Petitioner joined the Registrar of Companies, Delhi as a Lower
Division Clerk on 30.10.1987 and thereafter she was appointed as a
Lower Division Clerk at the Company Law Board (CLB for short) on
deputation basis on 18.02.1991. She was promoted to the post of Upper
Division Clerk on regular basis in the CLB on 03.01.2008. She was
subsequently promoted to the post of Assistant on regular basis in the
CLB on 28.02.2014.
3.
On 25.10.2016, Petitioner applied for being appointed to post of
Court Officer in NCLT, New Delhi Bench on deputation basis. By
Office Order dated 25.01.2017 passed by the Ministry of Corporate
Affairs (MCA), Petitioner along with other officers and employees
were transferred to NCLT with effect from 01.06.2016 in terms of
Section 466 read with Section 418(1) of the Companies Act, 2013.
4.
Petitioner was thereafter asked to appear for an interview before
the Selection Committee. On 09.03.2017, the Competent Authority of
Digitally Signed
By:RASHIM KAPOOR
Signing Date:03.07.2023
15:50:29
Signature Not Verified
NCLT selected the petitioner for the post of Court Officer in NCLT,
New Delhi Bench on deputation basis in the Pay Band (PB-2) of Rs.
9300-34800 + GP Rs. 4800 (Level-8) initially for a period of 1 year
from the date of assumption of charge of post.
5.
By Office Order dated 28.11.2017 Petitioner was reverted back
to the post of Assistant. However, by the same Office Order Petitioner
was assigned to look after the charge of the Court Officer but without
payment of any extra renumeration.
6.
On 21.01.2020, Respondent No. 1 notified the impugned Rules,
which prescribed that the post of Court Officer would be filled by 100%
promotion from the feeder post of Senior Legal Assistant with 2 years
regular service in Level 7 of Pay Matrix or from the post of Assistant,
with a degree in law and 6 years regular service in Level 6 in Pay
Matrix.
The
Rules
further
prescribed
that
in
case
of
deputation/absorption to the same post, a degree in law was
“preferable”.
7.
On 26.06.2020, the Deputy Registrar, NCLT New Delhi made a
request to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for grant of one time
relaxation to the Petitioner in terms of Rule 16 (Power to Relax) in the
notified Recruitment Rules. The request was made for relaxation for
Digitally Signed
By:RASHIM KAPOOR
Signing Date:03.07.2023
15:50:29
Signature Not Verified
promotion of the Petitioner in the feeder cadre of Assistant to the post
of Court Officer without insisting on a degree of law as a precondition.
8.
Thereafter vide letter dated 04.08.2020, the President of NCLT
also requested the MCA to relax the eligibility criteria of having a law
degree for the post of Court Offi
