IMPORANT POINT
The method adopted in the exigencies of the situation, inviting applications for recruitment from Employment Exchanges instead of by advertisement, cannot be labelled as unfair.

Headnote:(i) NON JOINDER OF PARTIES-Madhya Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III Education Service (Non-Collegiate Service) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973-Applications challenging amendments made in Rules concerning recruitment of Assistant Teachers under the Operation Black Board Scheme-Applicants did not possess requisite qualifications for being selected under the scheme-Selected/appointed candidates directly affected by the challenge not made parties-Defect of non joinder of necessary parties-Decision of Tribunal is vitiated. (Para 9)
       (ii) Madhya Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III Education Service (Non-Collegiate Service) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973-Rule 10(3), proviso-Validity of-Challenged on ground of conferring unguided and excessive delegation of powers to the State Government-Procedure for selection and criteria for selection-Power given to State Government to prescribe separate criteria and procedure for selection of candidates-Whether it is a case of excessive delegation ?-(No)-Discretion is given to Government itself and not to a subordinate officer-The fact that power of delegation is to be exercised by State Government itself is a safeguard against abuse of this power of delegation.
       Held : In the present case the criteria and procedure have to be prescribed by the State Government itself in exercise of power conferred on it by statutory Rules. This cannot be considered as excessive delegation. Also, prescribing of separate criteria and procedure is permitted only in specific circumstances. In the present case, the departure from normal recruitment process has been occasioned on account of the time-bound programme of the Operation Black Board Scheme. This necessitated a large number of Assistant Teachers being recruited to strengthen the education programme of the State within a time-bound schedule. If the State Government felt that the existing procedure would be unduly time-consuming, and provided a special procedure which is not unfair, no objection can be raised to such procedure when an express power has been conferred on the State in this connection. (Para 12)
       (iii) Madhya Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III Education Service (Non-Collegiate Service) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973-Recruitment of Assistant Teachers under Operation Black Board Scheme-Qualifications prescribed by amendment to Schedule III-Challenged as unfair-Prescribed qualifications are Basic Training Certificate or a B.Ed. Degree-State Government recognising a B.T. qualification as superior to Diploma T and other qualifications-Whether exclusion of other qualifications can be held to be discriminatory or unreasonable?-(No) -A higher qualification prescribed for a particular scheme cannot be considered as violative of Art. 14 of Constitution of India. (Paras 14, 15)
       (iv) SERVICE LAW-Recruitment-Inviting applications from Employment Exchange instead of by advertisement-Whether fair procedure-Held, in facts and circumstances of the case, a speedier process of selection and appointment requiring the special procedure-It is not unfair.
       Held : This procedure has been resorted to looking to the requirements of a time-bound scheme. The original applicants contended that if the posts had been advertised, many others like them could have applied. The original applicants who so complain, however, do not possess the requisite qualifications for the post. As far as we can see from the record, nobody who had the requisite qualifications, has complained that he was prevented from applying because advertisement was not issued. What is more important, in the special circumstances requiring a speedier process of selection and appointment, applications were invited through employment exchanges for 1993 only. In this context, the special procedure adopted is not unfair. (Para 16)
       There are different methods of inviting applications. The method adopted in the exigencies of the situation in the present case cannot be labelled as unfair, particularly when, at the relevant time, the two earlier decisions of this Court were in vogue. (Para 17)

JUDGMENT

Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J.-Delay in S.L.P. (C) Nos. 10462, 14389 and 26032 of 1995 is condoned.

Leave in S.L.P.(C) Nos. 10462, 14389, and 26032 of 1995 and 4579 of 1997 is granted.

Intervention applications are allowed.

2. Civil Appeal No. 77 of 1995 and appeals arising from the four special leave petitions are from a judgment and order of the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Jabalpur, dated 18.3.1994 in a group of applications challenging the amendments made in the Madhya Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III Education Service (Non-Collegiate Service) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973 by a notification published in Madhya Pradesh Government Gazette (Extra Ordinary) dated 10.5.1993 and another notification published in Madhya Pradesh Government Gazette (Extra Ordinary) dated 17.6.1993; as also the circulars of the School Education Department dated 5.8.1993 and 9.8.1993. By the impugned judgment and order, the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal struck down the two amendments and the circulars. These related to criteria and procedure for selection of Assistant Teachers in the Madhya Pradesh Education Service under the Operation Black Board Scheme. As a result, selection of around 7000 Assistant Teachers and the ongoing process of selection of such teachers in some districts was set aside at the instance of the applicants who were persons not eligible for selection under the impugned amendments.

C.A. No. 813/95 challenges a subsequent order of the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal dated 31.10.1994. In the group of applications finally decided on 18.3.1994, the Tribunal had granted on 14.9.1993 an interim stay of the impugned amendments and circulars. On 15.9.1993, the Deputy Director of Education, Hoshangabad issued appointment letters to 86 selected persons. These appointment letters have been set aside by the Tribunal in the light of its judgment and order of 18.3.1994, by the impugned order of 31.10.1994.

C.A. No. 4168/95 is against the order of the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal dated 26.11.1994. After the above interim order of 14.9.1993, the Deputy Director of Education, Dhar had issued on 16.9.1993 appointment letters to 48 selected candidates. He cancelled the appointments by his order of 26.7.1994 in view of the Tribunal s judgment and order of 18.3.1994. The selected candidates applied to the Tribunal for their continuation. Their applications have been dismissed by the Tribunal in view of its judgment and order of 18.3.1994, by the impugned order of 26.11.1994.

3. The recruitment, inter alia, of Assistant Teachers in Madhya Pradesh is governed by the Madhya Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III Education Service (Non-Collegiate Service) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973 (hereinafter called the Recruitment Rules ). The method of recruitment is direct recruitment by competitive examination followed by an interview. During the Eighth Plan period i.e. from 1992 to 1997 the Central Government sponsored a scheme known as Operation Black Board Scheme. Under this scheme the Government of India gave financial clearance to the State of Madhya Pradesh to implement this scheme by appointing an Additional Teacher in all primary/middle schools which had only one teacher in order to improve the standards of education. In order to implement the scheme the State of Madhya Pradesh decided to fill in about 7,000 to 11,000 posts of Assistant Teachers in such schools.

4. As the scheme was to be implemented within the Eighth Plan period, in order to expedite implementation, the respondent-State, on 10.5.1993, amended Rule 10(3) of the Recruitment Rules by adding a proviso. Rule 10 is as follows :-

"10. Direct Recruitment by Selection:

(1) There shall be a committee for selection by direct recruitment, the membership of which shall be like the membership of the Committee constituted for selection by promotion.

(2) Selection for recruitment to the service shall be held at such interva

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1997 Supreme(SC) 1559

IMPORANT POINTThe method adopted in the exigencies of the situation, inviting applications for recruitment from Employment Exchanges instead of by advertisement, cannot be labelled as unfair.

Cases Referred (6)

IMPORANT POINT
The method adopted in the exigencies of the situation, inviting applications for recruitment from Employment Exchanges instead of by advertisement, cannot be labelled as unfair.