Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1994 (9) TMI 357

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n these cases, has been spelt out by a good number of Constitution Bench decisions of this Court. It is not necessary to take note of all those cases. It would be enough to first apprise ourselves as to what such a Bench had said in the case of State of J K v. Triloki Nath Khosa1. Chandrachud, J., as he then was, speaking for self, Ray C.J., and Palekar, J., made certain pertinent observations in this regard which were very ably supplemented by Krishna Iyer, J., speaking for self and Bhagwati, J., as he then was. The sum and substance of what was stated in the leading judgment is that the guarantee of equality is precious and the theory of classification may not be allowed to be extended so as to subvert or submerge the same. Of course, while being called upon to decide whether the classification in question is constitutionally permissible, excellence in service has also to be borne in mind; so too the fact that excellence and equality are not friendly bedfellows. A pragmatic approach is, therefore, required to harmonise the requirements of public services with the aspirations of public servants. 3. Krishna Iyer, J., stated that the social meaning of Articles 14 and 16 is neithe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... v. Union of India [1975] 1 SCR 449 , wherein Bhagwati, J., as he then was, speaking for the unanimous court dealt with this aspect of the matter at pages 476 to 481 of the Report. After noting what was held in Khosa case,, it was pointed out that though educational qualifications can form basis of classification, it could not be laid down as an invariable rule that whenever any classification is made on such basis, the same must be held to be valid, irrespective of the nature and purpose of the classification or the quality and extent of the difference in the educational qualifications. The learned Judge required it to be remembered that life has relations not capable always of division into inflexible compartments . These moulds expand and shrink . It was thereafter observed that in a case it may be perfectly legitimate for the administration to say that having regard to the nature of the functions and duties attached to the post, for the purpose of achieving efficiency in public service, only degree-holders shall be eligible for promotion and not diploma or certificate-holders. It was then observed that though this distinction may be permissible for deciding the question of el .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he justification of job-requirements and in the interest of maintaining a certain quality of technical expertise in the cadre) can validly be excluded from the eligibility for promotion to the higher cadre, it does not necessarily follow as inevitable corollary that the choice of the recruitment policy is limited to two, namely, either to consider them 'eligible' or not eligible . The Bench then stated that the State is not precluded from conferring eligibility on diploma-holders conditioning it by other requirements like varying period of length of experience, which in the case of Roop Chand9 was 10 years for the diploma-holders and 8 years for degree-holders. It was concluded by stating that Article 16 would not prevent the State from formulating a policy which prescribes as an essential part of the conditions for the very eligibility that the candidate must have a particular qualification plus a stipulated quantum of service experience. Being of this view, the rule in question laying down different period of service experience for diploma-holders and degree-holders was not found violative of Articles 14 and 16. 9. Before adverting to the decision rendered in P Muruge .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eferred. 11. Murugesan Bench 10 thereafter noted the hallmark of Shujat Ali case5 which was the need to keep in mind the historical background of the service in question. Decisions in Shamkant7, Ravinder Kumar and Abdul Basheer were then traversed and the Bench upheld the validity of ratio of 3:1 between graduates and diploma-holders in promotion; so also, the longer qualifying period for service for diploma-holders. 12. An oven-hot decision was also brought to our notice the same being by a Bench of two Judges in Nageshwar Prasad v. Union of India, CA No. 3985/84 rendered on July 28, 1994. The Bench, after taking note of the decisions in Roop Chand, Dilip Kumar, Murugesan and Sujat Ali did not find fault with the prescription of 50% quota for the diploma-holders. 13. The aforesaid bird's-eye view of important decisions of this Court on the question of prescribing quota in promotion to higher post based on the educational qualification makes it clear that such a qualification can in certain cases be a valid basis of classification; and the classification need not be relatable only to the eligibility criteria, but to restrictions in promotion as well. Further, even if i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... SCR 23 about social justice being a part of fundamental right may not be accepted by all, there is little to doubt that social justice being a requirement of directive principles of our Constitution, the same has to be our desideratum in any case. 16. From what has been stated above, the following legal propositions emerge regarding educational qualification being a basis of classification relating to promotion in public service: (1) Higher educational qualification is a permissible basis of classification, acceptability of which will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. (2) Higher educational qualification can be the basis not only for barring promotion, but also for restricting the scope of promotion. (3) Restriction placed cannot however go to the extent of seriously jeopardising the chances of promotion. To decide this, the extent of restriction shall have also to be looked into to ascertain whether it is reasonable. Reasons for this are being indicated later. 17. Keeping in mind the aforesaid legal position, we may now advert to the facts of the cases at hand and decide whether the restriction on the promotion as placed by the provisions concerne .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 16 of SLP (C) No. 10645 of 1989. A perusal of the same shows that the degree-holder Assistant Engineers were designated as Assistant Engineer (Agriculture Engineering) and given gazetted status, whereas diploma-holders were denied the same. This apart, the degree-holders were given higher scale of pay. The affidavit further shows that the post of Executive Engineer (Agricultural Engineering) calls for higher skill, administration, planning and evolving of proposals and drafting. In these aspects most of the diploma-holders were found lacking. It has been mentioned in this affidavit that the degree-holders had studied for six years at college level after leaving school stage, whereas diploma-holders have only three years' study at the level of Institute of Technology after school stage. Because of this, higher technical calibre in degree-holders is presumed. Insofar as the common seniority list is concerned, the submission in the counter-affidavit is that the same did not allow (sic) to give preference in promoting graduates to the level of Assistant Executive Engineer (Agricultural Engineering) in the department . The further averment is that in other departments where separat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vice have to be dismissed. TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD SERVICE CASES 25. The writ petitioners and appellants, among whom is the Engineering Diploma-holders' Association, have challenged the decision of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board which amended the Board's Service Regulations fixing ratio of 3:1 for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineers (Electrical) between the Junior Engineers (Electrical) and Supervisors (Electrical Grade-1) the former being degree- holders and latter diplomaholders. 26. The aforesaid shows that the classification is based on higher educational qualification and the same has to receive our approval because for certain types of work the Supervisors are not sufficiently qualified, whereas Junior Engineers are. The nature of the work performed by the two classes of post holders and the higher educational qualification of the degree-holders did permit the Electricity Board to classify the two groups differently for the purpose of their promotion. As to the ratio of 3: 1, we have applied our mind and we have come to the conclusion that we may not interfere with the same because of the fact that any different view would create almost a chaotic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates