K. Manickaraj
Vs. U O I [1997] INSC 376 (2 April 1997)
K.
RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
PATTANAIK,
J.
Delay
condoned.
Leave
granted.
This
appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench dated 19.9.1995 in OA No. 267 of 1994.
The Said application has been filed by the appellant for a direction to the
railway administration to promote the appellant as Welfare Inspector Grade - II
with effect from 2.4.1993 as one post was available in the reserved category.
The
brief facts necessary for deciding this appeal are stated as under :
The
appellant was appointed as Assistant Station Master in the scale Rs. 330-560
and was then promoted to a higher post in the scale of Rs. 425-640 with effect
from 8.1.1985.
He was
further promoted as Welfare Inspector grade - III in the scale of Rs. 1480-2300
and joined the said post on 27.12.1991. The appellant admittedly belongs to
Scheduled Caste. The cadre of Welfare Inspectors consisted or 3 categories: namely:
Welfare Inspector Grade - I in the scale of Rs. 2000-32000; Welfare Inspector
Grade - II in scale of Rs. 1600-2660 and Welfare Inspector Grade-III in the
scale of Rs. 1400-2300. By Order dated 27th January, 1993 the cadre strength of the different
categories of Welfare Inspectors was restructured and it was directed that 35%
of posts would be in Grade - I, 40% in Grade-II and 25% in Grade - III. In view
of the change of percentage of he different categories of posts, the appellant
expected a promotion to Grade - II but the same having not been done, he filed
the application before the Tribunal. It was averred in the application filed
before the Tribunal that three posts from Grade-III having been upgraded to
grade - II, total number of posts available in Grade-II is 26 as against the
original number of 23 and since there is reservation of 15% for Scheduled
Caste, the total number of posts available for the Scheduled Caste in Grade -
II would work out at 4 but factually only 3 persons belonging to the Scheduled
Caste are working in Grade - II, and therefore, the appellant was entitled to
promotion to Grade - II. The respondent in the counter-affidavit filed,
however, contended that there has been no change in the strength of the post in
grade - II which remained at 23 but for sports personnel some posts were
upgraded from grade-III to grade - II and those upgraded posts cannot be taken
into account for determining the number of posts available for reserved
category as such upgradation was temporary in nature and is not a permanent
addition to the number of posts, and therefore, can't be taken into account for
computation 15% reservation in the said Grade - II. The Tribunal by the
impugned judgment accepted the contention raised by the respondent and came to hold
that the posts which have been upgraded having been borrowed from grade - III
and being specially meant for sports personnel cannot be counted for
determining the 15% reserved quota meant for Scheduled Caste, and therefore,
the cadre strength of Grade - II being 23 only 3 persons from the Scheduled
Caste would be promoted to the Grade - II and thus three persons having already
been there the claim of the appellant cannot be allowed. With this conclusion
the Tribunal having dismissed the application filed by the appellant, the
present appeal has been preferred.
The
question that arises for consideration, therefore, is whether the number of
upgraded post from Grade - III to Grade - II meant for sports personnel can be
taken into account for determining the number of reserved posts available for
Scheduled Case in Grade- II. It is admitted that total number of posts is
grade- II was 23 and 3 posts from Grade - III were upgraded to that of Grade -
II. The upgraded posts which were made as early as in August 1987, as per
Memorandum dated 24.08.1987, still continues. It is, therefore, not possible
for us to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that
the alleged upgradation was made for ra temporary period meant for sports
personnel. The post which were upgraded in the year 1988 having continued still
dated, the cadre strength of Grade - II inspectors must be held to have become
26 and not 23 as contended by the respondent. If 15% of the cadre is meant for
reserve category people then it would work out at 4 and admittedly there are
only 3 persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste in Grade - II. In that view of
the matter the appellant was entitled to be promoted against the 15% reserved
quota of posts i Grade - II to be 26. In our considered opinion Tribunal was in
error in not taking into account the upgraded posts which have been upgraded
from grade - III to Grade - II on the ground that it was meant for sports
personnel. While computing the number of post available for reserved category, there
is no justification to exclude the upgrade post which had continued from 1988
till date.
In the
aforesaid premises the impugned judgment of the Tribunal is set aside and OA
No. 267 of 1944 filed in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Stands allowed.
The respondents are directed to consider the case of promotion of the appellant
to a post in Grade-II, Welfare inspector, with effect from 1993. The appeal is
allowed. There will be no order as to costs.
Back
Pages: 1 2