@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
K. Chandru, J.@mdashHeard both sides.
2. These three writ petitions are filed by the Petitioners who are the Graduates in B.Sc., (Horticulture) and they also got registered in the Employment Exchange as early as 1990 and are waiting in queue for getting appointment to the post under the Department of Horticulture and Plantation and Crops. These three Petitioners have now come forward to challenge the order in G.O.Ms. No. 537, Agricultural Department, dated 24.12.2007 and the notification issued by the Respondent/TNPSC calling for the applications for filling up the post of Agricultural Officers (Extension) coming under the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Extension Service by Advertisement No. 159.
3. The main prayer of the Petitioners as culled out from the writ petitions found para 9 of the impugned order providing for transfer of part of staffs and posts from the Agricultural Directorate and the consequential notification in Advertisement No. 159 issued by the TNPSC.
4. There are already several similarly placed persons have challenged the notification in Advertisement No. 159 issued by the TNPSC on the ground that those posts cannot be filled up with B.Sc., (Agriculture) graduates alone. Even the candidates who are having B.Sc., (Horticulture) must be considered for the post. Those writ petitions starting from W.P. No. 1049 of 2009 and batch cases came to be dismissed by this Court today. It was held that graduates in Agriculture and Graduates in Horticulture cannot compare themselves as equivalent. Insofar as the rules provided for recruitment has prescribed only a particular qualification other persons'' with different educational qualification cannot get in. In these three cases, the Petitioners cannot question the reorganisation of the Department by the State Government for which the order G.O.Ms. No. 537, Agricultural Department dated 24.12.2007, came to be issued.
5. Since the paragraph ''9'' is impugned in the writ petition, it is necessary to set out the entire paragraph thus:
9. The Government have examined the proposals of all four Directorates in detail. The Government have also examined the staffing pattern of each Directorate and have found that there is excess staff and officers in the Directorate of Agriculture in the changed scenario, whereas there is shortage of staff at critical levels in the other three Directorate of Horticulture, Marketing and Seed Certification. Keeping in view the over all objective and giving timely and complete solution to the needs of the farmers, it is essential to transfer a part of staff and posts from the Agriculture Directorate to the other 3 Directorates. Simultaneously, it is also important to give refresher and re-orientation training to the staff to upgrade their technical and managerial skills. The details of the above objectives are given in the following paragraphs:
a) In all Directorates at head office some cadres from the supervisory levels shall be cut down. Below the Director, there will be only 2 levels-One level of Additional Director/Joint Director/Deputy Director and the other level of Assistant Director/Agricultural Officer/Horticultural Officer. This will cut down the delay in file processing, scheme formulations and decisions making and improve accountability.
b) At district level, senior officers shall be posted for better decision making and implementation.
i. Officers at the levels of Deputy Directors shall be posted as District Heads with respect to the Directorates of Horticulture and Agricultural Marketing and Agri Business. However, one joint Director of Horticulture shall be posted each for Kodaikanal and Nilgiris in view of the immense potential of Horticultural Crops.
ii. For Seed Certification Directorate, one Assistant Director per District for certification wing and one Deputy Director for seed inspection wing for every two District shall be posted.
iii. For agriculture, a staff pattern of 1 Joint Director, 2 Deputy Directors and 1 Assistant Director shall be at the district level keeping in mind the multiple functions of Agriculture.
iv. Sufficient supporting staff to these officers shall be provided in accordance with the work load in the offices.
c) Block level apparatus of each Directorate will be strengthened. For Agriculture it is 1-Assistant Director, 2-8 Agricultural Officers/Deputy Agricultural Officers and 6-7 Assistant Seed Officers/Assistant Agricultural Officers except in Nilgiris District, Kodaikanal and Yercaud Taluks; for Horticulture, it is 1-Assistant Director for each block except in delta districts where for the 48 Blocks 24 posts will be filled up at the ratio of 1:2, 1-Horticultural Officer and 4 - Assistant Seed Officers/Assistant Horticultural Officers; for Marketing and Seed Certification it would be 1-Agricultural Officer/Deputy Agricultural Officer each for 2 blocks.
d) Sufficient staff shall be provided for Uzhavar Sandhais.
10) The two wings of Agriculture viz., Extension and Research (Chemistry) are currently functioning separately under separate service rules. Rotating of staff between the two wings will enhance the technical and managerial capacity of the staff. Moreover, the qualification for both the cadres is same (i.e.) B.Sc (Agri). Therefore, these two wings will be merged so that in future, there will be only one cadre for managing both extension and research functions. Provisions will be made to ensure that the merger does not affect the seniority, promotional prospects and service conditions of each cadre. Similarly, the staff going to Horticulture, Seeds Certification and Marketing from Agriculture will continue to enjoy the same seniority and promotional prospects they are presently getting in Agriculture Department.
6. According to the Petitioners, if after reorganisation posts are filled up in the Agriculture Department, due to the reorganisation of staff pattern the scope for member of other Directorates, such as, Horticulture will have no posts to be filled up in future. Consequently, the chances of Petitioners getting in to Government service will become bleak. Therefore, they have not only questioned the notification calling for applications to fill up 520 Extension Officers exclusively 9 by the B.Sc(Agri) candidates.
7. Mr. M.E. Elango, learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that since by the reorganisation, their chances of appointment have become reduced or weakened they can always challenge such reorganisation.
8. But however, the Supreme Court vide judgment in
33. ...Probably the "safeguards" referred to in the passage at SCR p. 841 in Parshotam Lal Dhingra case meant an abolition of posts which was in good faith and not a pretence of abolition of a post resorted to in order to get rid of its incumbent and the creation of the same post with a different form or name with a new incumbent. The above view of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir is, however, in conflict with the decision in M. Ramanatha Pillai case and hence must be considered as having been overruled by this Court. In modern administrations, it is necessary to recognise the existence of the power with the legislature or the executive to create or abolish posts in the civil service of the State. The volume of administrative work, the measures of economy and the need for streamlining the administration to make it more efficient may induce the State Government to make alterations in the staffing patterns of the civil service necessitating either the increase or the decrease in the number of posts. This power is inherent in the very concept of governmental administration. To deny that power to the Government is to strike at the very roots of proper public administration. The power to abolish a post which may result in the holder thereof ceasing to be a government servant has got to be recognised. But we may hasten to add that any action legislative or executive taken pursuant to that power is always subject to judicial review.
9. Therefore, the challenge made to the notification issued by the Tamil Nadu Government and the consequential advertisement by TNPSC is misconceived. As it is well known that the TNPSC is only a recruiting agency, it has the duty to fill up the posts as notified by the State Government.
10. Under these circumstances, there is no case made out in these writ petitions and hence the writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions in all the writ petitions are also dismissed.
