🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Ashim Kumar Paul and Others Vs Chairman, Standing Selection Committee II, West Bengal State Electricity Board and Others

Case No: F.M.A.T. No. 1342 of 1987

Date of Decision: March 9, 1988

Citation: 92 CWN 1149

Hon'ble Judges: G.N. Ray, J

Bench: Single Bench

Advocate: Parimal Dasgupta and Niranjan Ganguly, for the Appellant;Arun Prokas Sircar and Rupen Mitra, for the Respondent

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

G.N. Ray, J.@mdashThis appeal is directed against order dated 10th April, 1987 passed by the learned Trial Judge in C.O. No. 3319(W) of

1987. By the aforesaid order, the writ petition made by the appeallants was dismissed by the learned Trial Judge, The aforesaid writ petition was

moved by the appellants inter alia challenging the recommendations made by the respondent No. 1 viz. the Chairman, Standing Selection

Committee (II) for filing up the vacancies for several posts mentioned in the writ petition. The appellants contended in the writ petition that the said

Chairman Standing Selection Committee II exceeded his jurisdiction in recommending an excess number of employees than required or notified

under Circular No. 1/85 dated 28.1.1985 inviting applications from eligible candidates for filling up one-third of the vacancies (non-technical class

III posts) through departmental test. The said appellants also contended that the said Chairman also exceeded his jurisdiction in keeping the list of

the successful candidates in force for three years. It appears that the West Bengal State Electricity Board adopted a policy to have 2/3rd of the

vacancies in non-technical Class III posts to be filled up by promotees from amongst the eligible candidates of the departments recommended on

seniority basis. The balance one-third of such vacancies are to be filled up through departmental tests and in order to be eligible, a candidate must

have specified continuous service in the relevant feeder posts of non-technical Class III post. The requirement for being qualified for the purpose of

appearing in the departmental test including the eligibility clause has been specified. In order to impliment the said policy, a notice was issued for

holding the examination on the 28th of January, 1985 being Circular No. 1/85 and approximate posts for which such examination was proposed to

be held were also mentioned. It is the case of the appellants that some of the appellants were eligible to sit for such examination for the purpose of

promotion to some of the posts and others were not eligible in the year 1985 when the circular was issued but subsequently they have also become

eligible by rendering five years'' continuous services in the feeder posts. The appellants have contended that from the circular it will appears that

such circular was intended for the purpose of selecting candidates for accelerated promotion for the one-third quota for a particular period. It was

later on decided behind their back that the successful candidates in the said examination will remain in panel which will be valid for three years and

not only the vacancies for which applications were invited but other vacancies subsequently occuring would be filled up from the said panel and

only after the said panel is exhausted or becomes defunct after the expiry of three years, the examination will be held for the purpose of filling up

the said one-third vacancies through the selection test, The appellants have contended that such decision to fill up the posts for which the circular

was not issued and to keep the said list of successful candidates in the panel valid for three years were wholly illegal and unauthorised and on that

score, the decisions taken to keep the said panel valid for the three years and also the decision taken in giving promotion to persons from such

panel in the vacancies arising in the mean time must be held to be illegal. The learned Trial Judge has not however allowed the said writ petition and

the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants. Mr. Dasgupta, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants has contended that the

appellants and or the other employees of the West Bengal State Electricity Board may not have any absolute right to get any promotion but when a

policy has been adopted by the Board to give accelerated promotion to one-third posts in the non-technical cadre on the basis of selection tests,

the eligible candidates have a right to appear in such selection test, and to get a reasonable chance of being selected on the basis of the results

made in the said examination. It has been contended by Mr. Dasgupta that when the Circular was issued in January, 1985 the approximate posts

for which such examination was intended to be taken or invited was mentioned. The number of vacancies mentioned in the notice or circular clearly

indicates that the same was for the vacancy for one year. By using the expression ""approximate"" against the number mentioned in the circular it

cannot be reasonably contended that the vacancies will include future vacancies which may arise within a span of two or three years thereafter. The

eligible candidates were never informed by any appropriate authority that the examination for selection for one third post will not be held every

year but on the basis of results in the said examination, the panel will be prepared for three years and all vacancies then prepared for three years

will arise within a span of next two years will also be filled up from the said panel which will remain valid for 3 years. If such intimation is not given

to the employees but an examination is proposed to be held for the purpose of filing up the vacancies then arising by mentioning the number of

posts in the circular, it was not permissible on the part of the authority to change the decision at a later stage and to prepare a panel for three years

and to fill up not only the vacancies for which notification was issued, but subsequent vacancies arising thereafter from the said panel. It appears

from the affidavit-in-opposition that as it was felt by the Director of Personnel that the annual examination or frequent examinations were

impracticable and such examination should be held after a lapse of two or three years, a recommendation was made by the Director of. Personnel

that on the basis of results made in the selection test, a panel should be prepared for three years and the vacancies which will occur at the time of

examination and also the vacancies which will subsequently arise should be filled up from the panel to be kept valid for three years. Such

recommendation appeared reasonable to the Chairman of the West Bengal State Electricity Board and he had accepted the same and on such

basis the Chairman of the Selection Committee recommeded the names not only for the posts initially notified but also for the posts which became

vacant subsequently and as a matter of fact, promotions have been given to such posts on the basis of the names included in the said panel.

2. Mr. Arun Prokas Sircar, learned Counsel for the Respondents has submitted, that the decision taken by the Chairman of the Board is only

reasonable and at the time when the examination was held, some of the writ petitioners then eligible did not choose to appear and others were not

even eligible to appear at the examination. On the basis of the result of the examination, such posts have been filled up and as such no exception

should be taken against the decision of the concerned authority. Mr. Sarkar, learned Counsel has also submitted that the persons who have been

given promotion in the said one-third quota in the non-technical cadre on the basis of their results in the selection test, are also not parties to the

writ proceeding and no decision should be made adversely affecting them without giving them an opportunity of being heard.

3. After taking into consideration the facts and circumstances disclosed in the writ petition and the affidavits filed by the parties and hearing the

learned Counsels for the respective parties, it appears to us that the West Bengal State Electricity Board had taken a decision to the effect that one

third posts in the non-technical cadre will be filled up from the eligible candidates holding the feeder posts for continuous five years provided they

became successful in the selection test held for the said purpose. In the said decision/policy no indication has been given how such examination will

be held of when such examination will be held and whether the persons qualified in such examination will remain empanelled for a particular year or

for some years. It can, therefore, reasonably be contended that for the purpose of implementing the decision of the West Bengal State Electricity

Board for filling up one third posts through selection tests, procedures for holding such examination and for empanelment may be made but we are

of the view that the concerned authorities are under an obligation to enlighten the employees as to how the empanelment is proposed to be made

and they are also under an obligation to inform before the examination that the successful candidates will be empanelled for three years if it was

decided to keep the panel valid for three years. It appears that the appellants are justified in their contentions that when the notification was issued

for holding the examination for the purpose of filing up the said posts, the notification had indicated that the said examination was meant for the

purpose of filling up the posts then lying vacant. By using the expression ""approximately"" it cannot be held that the posts which were not then

vacant was also intended to be filled up. In our view, some of the writ petitioners who were eligible to sit for the examination can reasonably

contend that it was not made known to them that the examination was really intended to fill up the posts which will subsequently become vacant

and such examination is intended to be held every three years and the panel to be prepared from the successful candidates is to remain valid for

three years. Some of them might have intended to appear in the said examination if such fact was made known to them. That apart, it also appears

to us that in order to implement the decision of the Board, the Chairman of the Board should not have taken a decision after the said examination

that the panel should be prepared for filling up the subsequent vacancies and the same should remain valid for three years without any reference to

the Board. It appears to us that such decision is a major policy decision touching the interest of a large number of employees and since the same

had been taken for the purpose of implementing a policy decision of the Board, the recommendation of the Chairman for holding the examination

for selection once in every three years and to keep the panel valid for three years should have been placed before the Board for ratification. In any

event, such decision cannot be taken after the examination was held thereby depriving a large number of employees who chose not to appear for

the limited posts for which the examination was proposed to be held.

4. In the aforesaid circumstances, we dispose of this appeal by directing that the Respondents will not treat the said panel valid for three years. The

promotion given to the successful candidates on the basis of the said selection test should be limited to the posts for which the notification was

given. As in the mean time, other posts have fallen vacant and some posts are likely to fall vacant before another selection test is held, the persons

who have qualified in the selection test held earlier may be given adhoc promotion if they had not been given promotion as yet but such promotion

already given to other candidates to the posts not notified in the circular and/or other ad-hoc promotions to be given to some other successful

candidates from the panel should be treated as only ad-hoc promotions for running the administration. The Respondents will hold a selection test

for filling up the vacancies not notified in the Circular No. 1/85 dated 28th January, 1985 pertaining to the posts mentioned in the writ petition and

also the subsequent circular issued for the said purpose. It is intended that such selection test will be held only periodically and the panel from the

successful candidates in such selection test will remain valid for a specified period, such decision should be placed before the Board and the

Board''s decision should be made known to all employees before the examination is held.

5. It is made clear that in future examination, all the eligible candidates including the candidates who had already qualified in the earlier test and who

have already been empanelled excepting the candidates absorbed against the posts notified in the said circular on the basis of the tenth position in

the test should also be entitled to appear and on the basis of the results in such examination to be held, the vacancies not mentioned in the said

Circular No. 1/85 and also the vacancies arising thereafter will be filled up and if any of the candidates who may be holding promoted posts on the

footing of adhoc promotion in terms of the directions given in this order are not found eligible on the basis of merit positions in future examination,

such candidates will have to step down for making room to others who may be found eligible for promotion on the basis of merit position in the

selection test to the held in future. Since no other examination has been held, it is only desirable that such examination should be held as early as

possible so that the eligible candidates can get an opportunity to appear in the Selection test and to get the accelerated promotion in terms of the

decision of the Board.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

There will be no order as to costs.

K.M. Yusuf, J.

I agree.

Download Judgement PDF