9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 376X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er terminating the services of the appellant, the original writ petitioner has preferred the present appeal. 3. That respondent no.2 hereinCentral Railside Warehouse Company Limited invited applications for the post of Company Secretary. That respondent no.2's advertisement, specifically provided for, five years post qualification mandatory experience as a Company Secretary as on 30.11.2013 in a PSU/Private Company of repute. The appellant herein applied for the post of Company Secretary. In her application she categorically stated that she had post qualification experience of seven years and three months. That thereafter she appeared in an interview held by respondent no.2 and was offered appointment to the post of Company Secretary vide memorandum dated 13.03.2014. Thereafter, she was appointed on regular basis to the post of Company Secretary by Office Order dated 22.04.2014. A show cause notice dated 01.11.2014 was issued by respondent no.2 calling upon the appellant to explain why her services should not be terminated as she did not have the requisite five years' experience for the post of Company Secretary. The appellant submitted her reply to the above show cause notice. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of the Company Secretary Act 1980. It is submitted therefore, the High Court committed an error to hold that the appellant was not having the requisite experience as a Company Secretary. 5.3 Relying upon prescribed format of submitting the application attached with the application form, it is submitted that what was required was the qualification/ experience as Company Secretary and not actual working as Company Secretary. 5.4 It is further submitted by Shri Sunil Kumar, learned senior counsel that as far as the experience gained by the appellant while working with Bharat Bhushan Shares and Commodity Brokers Limited is concerned, the High Court has committed a grave error in considering the experience only till May, 2007, though the Form32 shows the date of cessation as 29.06.2007. 5.5 Relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Dr. Asim Kumar Bose v. Union of India and Others (1983) 1 SCC 345, it is submitted by Shri Sunil Kumar that as observed and held by this Court, the word 'as' must be interpreted in its ordinary sense as 'in the capacity of' or be interpreted as the words like, 'similar to', 'of the same kind', 'in the same manner' or 'in the manner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6.2 Further Shri Banerji submitted that, therefore, when it was found that the total post qualification experience of the appellant 'as' Company Secretary was less than five years against the requirement of minimum five years' experience and thereafter when the services of the appellant were terminated on the ground that at the time when the application was invited, she was not fulfilling the eligibility criteria, her services have been rightly terminated. It is submitted that the High Court in the impugned judgment and order has considered in detail the experience of the appellant while working in Delhi Stock Exchange Association Limited; Bharat Bhushan Shares and Commodity Brokers Limited; Utkal Investment Limited and thereafter considering the material on record, has rightly refused to interfere with the order of termination and has rightly rejected the petition. 6.3 Shri Banerji. Learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of this Court in the case of Dr. Asim Kumar Bose (supra) relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant is concerned, it is submitted by Shri Banerji that on f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the period between April 2005 to June 2006, and as the Management Trainee in ONGC for the period between May 2003 to June 2004. Her appointment as Management Trainee cannot be equated and/or considered as appointment 'as' a Company Secretary. 7.3 The word 'as' used in the advertisement should be given a literal meaning. The respondent is the author of the advertisement and they are the best person to consider what they meant by using the word 'as'. It is the specific case on behalf of the respondents that the intention behind the advertisement was that the applicant must have been appointed 'as' a Company Secretary in PSU/Company of repute and functioned as such for five years to be eligible for appointment. According to the respondent, the purpose was that the person should have held the position of a Company Secretary in a PSU/Company of repute and discharged the statutory functions as such i.e. should have held the position of responsibility. Therefore, when the word 'as' is specifically used, the same is to be considered strictly and therefore the experience of the appellant, while working as a 'Management Trainee' cannot be considered as an experience of working 'as' a C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al College, Delhi to which Irwin Hospital was affiliated. He was not considered for the regular appointment to the post of Associate Professor of Radiotherapy in that college on the ground that his teaching experience as ex officio Associate Professor was not to be counted. Rule 8(2A) of the Central Health Service Rules was under consideration by this Court which provided that a candidate shall have the teaching experience as an Associate Professor. The appellant was having the experience as an Associate Professor of Radiology (Exofficio) and therefore it was the case on behalf of the Union of India that he was not having the teaching experience as Associate Professor as he worked as an Associate Professor of Radiology (exofficio). To that, this Court observed and held that the provisions contained in Rule 8(2A) and paragraph 3 of Annexure I to the Second Schedule of the Central Health Service Rules must be interpreted in a broad and liberal sense so as to avoid any injustice to person in specialists' Grade like the appellant. This Court observed that the Rules nowhere provide that the teaching experience gained by a Specialist in a teaching hospital as an Associate Professor (ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
