TMI Blog2009 (3) TMI 980X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15.9.1987. The EDP consisted of four divisions viz. Software, Hardware, Data Communications and Computer Operations. Indian Airlines Officers' Association vide its representations dated 19.9.1990 and 28.9.1990 suggested and requested the Management to merge the hardware and software cadres and to prepare a common seniority list. A common seniority list dated 24.9.1990 had been drawn for the purpose of promotions. 4. Thereafter interviews were held on 15.10.1990 for the post of Deputy Manager (Maintenance/Systems). The said post was to be filled from the merged seniority list of hardware and software cadres. The Management vide its letter dated 23.11.1990 informed the appellant and others that their candidatures were being considered for filling up the post of Deputy Manager (Maintenance/Systems). Thereafter, respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 were selected for the post of Deputy Manager (Maintenance/Systems). The appellant unsuccessfully challenged the promotion of respondent nos. 2 to 4 as the writ petition filed by her was dismissed and confirmed in Letters Patent Appeal by the Division Bench of the High Court. 5. The High Court inter alia held that promotion to the post of Dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. The agreement/settlement is contrary to the Recruitment and Promotion Rules. 7. Shri P.S. Narasimha, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent ably supported the judgment under appeal and submitted that the impugned judgment does not suffer from any errors requiring interference of this court. 8. Be it noted, the appellant did not make any challenge in the writ petition as regards the validity of the merger of two cadres. She, however, appears to have raised the dispute for the first time in her rejoinder affidavit filed in the High Court. There is no prayer to set aside the settlement arrived at between the Management and the Officers' Association of which she is also a member. It is not as if the appellant was not aware of the merger of two streams in the EDP Department and consequent preparation of a combined seniority list. The appellant was a party- respondent in writ petition No. 3647/93 in which the same issue as the one raised by the appellant had fallen for consideration and the High Court after an elaborate consideration found nothing wrong with the settlement and merger of the cadres. The Letters Patent Appeal no. 75/94 preferred ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provides that each of the Corporations may subject to the rules made by the Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, make regulations not inconsistent with the Act or the rules made thereunder for the administration of the affairs of the Corporation and for carrying out its functions; the regulations inter alia may provide for the terms and conditions of service of officers and other employees of the Corporation other than the Managing Director and officers of any other categories referred to in Section 44. The regulations made are also required to be placed before each House of Parliament. The Parliament is entitled to make modifications. 10. The Indian Airlines Corporation vide its Notification dated 6th April, 1955 in exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 45 of the Act (27 of 1953) with the previous approval of the Central Government notified the regulations which have come into force from 1st January, 1955. The Regulations are called the Indian Airlines Corporation Employees Service Regulations, 1955. The Regulations deal with the conditions of service, recruitment, promotion, discipline, control and appeal, pay an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... slation of any kind. They are in the nature of statements of policy and the practice of government departments, statutory authorities, whether published or otherwise. Statutory rules, which are made under the provisions of any enactment and regulations, subject to Parliamentary approval stand on entirely different footing. The administrative rules are always considered and have repeatedly been held to be rules of administrative practice merely, not rules of law and not delegated legislation and they have no statutory force. Mere description of such rules of administrative practice as rules does not make them to be statutory rules. Such administrative rules can be modified, amended or consolidated by the authorities without following any particular procedure. There are no legal restrictions to do so as long as they do not offend the provisions of the Constitution or statutes or statutory rules as the case may be. 13. In the present case the agreement/settlement arrived at between the Management and its Officers' Association has the effect of protanto amending the Recruitment and Promotion Rules. The Rules and the agreement/settlement are complimentary to each other and have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such settlement does not run counter or contrary to any statutory instrument. Once it is to be held that the Recruitment and Promotions Rules are not statutory in nature but are in the nature of guidelines, there are no impediments to uphold the merger of software and hardware cadres into one cadre. Be it noted, the appellant did not question the merger of cadres in the writ petition filed by her except contending the decision of the authorities of merger of two cadres into one was in violation of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules. No doubt an attempt was made by the appellant to contend before us that the merger of the two cadres into one is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. This belated attempt on the part of the appellant cannot be countenanced and we cannot entertain any such plea at this stage without there being any pleadings in that regard in the writ petition filed in the High Court. 18. The appellant herself relied on number of recruitments and promotion guidelines issued from time to time without questioning and challenging the same. The agreement between the Corporation and its Officers' Association including the promotion of 2nd res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f service, alteration thereof by amending rules, constitution, classification, abolition of posts, cadres or categories of service, amalgamation or bifurcation of departments, reconstitution, restructuring of the pattern etc. as the same pertain to the field of policy within the exclusive jurisdiction of the employer, subject to limitations or restrictions envisaged in the Constitution. There is no right in any employee to claim that rules governing conditions of his service should be forever the same as the one when he entered service for all purposes and except for ensuring rights or benefits already earned, acquired or accrued at a particular point of time, a government servant has no right to challenge the authority of the State to amend, alter and bring into force new rules relating to existing service. (See: P.U. Joshi Vs. Accountant General [(2003) 2 SCC 632]. The High Court came to the right conclusion that the promotion of the respondent no. 2 as Deputy Manager (Maintenance/Systems) is not vitiated for any reason whatsoever requiring interference. 20. Now we shall consider the question whether promotion of respondent no. 3 and 4 was valid? The selection of responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abundantly clear that suitability of a candidate for promotion has to be compared with others eligible for promotion. Promotion to selection grade is to be on the basis of `selection on merit' from amongst the employees in grades or inter-linked grades below the grade concerned and shall be limited to the number of posts declared as such on the cadre according to the sanctioned strength from time to time. Rule 22 is specific in its terms. It says, in case of `selection grade posts', the selection is a `rigorous selection on merit'. 22. It is not the case of the appellant that her case was not at all considered for promotion to the post of Deputy Manager (Maintenance/Systems). It is clear from the record that the claim of the appellant for promotion was duly considered along with other eligible candidates including respondent nos. 3 and 4 who were ultimately found eligible and suitable for promotion. The Selection Board having assessed the ratings of each of the previous three years' annual performance appraisals and performance of the appellant in the interview found her not suitable for promotion. The respondent nos. 3 and 4 had outstanding ratings in their ann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. In the said case, this Court held as under: Law on the proportion between written test and interview or evaluation on confidential entries and personality test have been laid down in a series of decisions by this Court commencing from Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi; Lila Dhar v. State of Rajasthan; Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana and State of U.P. v. Rafiquddin. Distinction appears to have been drawn in interview held for competitive examinations or admission in educational institutions and selection for higher posts. Effort has been made to eliminate scope of arbitrariness in the former by narrowing down the proportion as various factors are likely to creep in. But same standard cannot be applied for higher selections. Lila Dhar case brings it out fully. In respondent's case the personality of the respondent was being judged by a Committee constituted under the rules for purposes of higher promotional posts and, therefore, it was governed by the ratio laid down in Lila Dhar case and it would be unsafe to strike down the rules as arbitrary when the evaluation was job oriented. Marks to be allotted by the Committee were on professional ability and management ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
