Union Public Service Commission & Anr. Vs. A.K.Salim & Ors. [2008]
INSC 986 (16
May 2008)
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL
APPEAL NO. OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 21416 of 2007) Union Public
Service Commission and another ... Appellants Versus A.K. Salim and others ...
Respondents
J.M. PANCHAL, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The instant appeal is directed
against judgment dated October 18, 2007 rendered by the High Court of Kerala at
Ernakulam in W.P.(C) No.
30695 of 2007 by which direction
dated 2 September 11, 2007, given by the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Ernakulam Bench in M.A. No. 649 of 2007, which was filed in O.A. No.
26 of 2007, given to UPSC, New
Delhi to convene the Selection Committee meeting based on the proposal already
received from the State Government vide letters dated May 10, 2007 and June 15,
2007 for considering the case of the applicant for promotion to the Indian
Forest Service, without waiting for further proposals in respect of additional
vacancies, is upheld.
3. The respondent No. 1, i.e., Mr.
A.K. Salim, was appointed as a Forest Range Officer on November 1, 1977. He was
thereafter promoted as Assistant Conservator of Forest on January 5, 1995. He
was also promoted as Deputy Conservator of Forest (non-cadre). The appointment
to Indian Forest Service is governed by the provisions of Indian Forest
Services (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966.
The respondent No. 1 was confirmed
in the cadre 3 post of Assistant Conservator of Forest with effect from July 1,
2001. In the seniority list of Assistant Conservator of Forest he was placed at
serial No. 24 and was also granted integrity certificate for consideration of
his appointment to Indian Forest Service. The name of the respondent No. 1 was
included in the select list prepared in terms of the Regulations of 1966 for
the years 2004 and 2005. Since the respondent No. 1 was confirmed in the cadre
post of Assistant Conservator of Forest with effect from July 1, 2001 and had
completed eight years of service in the year 2003, his name was considered and
included for the four vacancies that arose during the year 2004. Similarly his
name for promotion to Indian Forest Service was included in the year 2005 for
the two vacancies which had arisen in that year. However, he was found to be
ineligible for being considered for the vacancies for the years 2004 and 2005
since he had not completed the prescribed eight years' 4 service. Likewise, he
was found ineligible for being considered for the sole vacancy of the year
2006. The Selection Committee for Indian Forest Service met on December 22,
2006 and selected candidates for eight vacancies for the years 2003, 2004 and
2005. However, the Selection Committee did not consider filling up the sole
vacancy of the year 2006. The reason for not considering filling up of the said
vacancy was lack of proposal from the State Government and the Principal
Secretary Forest, Government of Kerala. The respondent No. 1 made
representations for his promotion to Indian Forest Service but of no avail. He,
therefore, moved O.A. No. 26 of 2007 before the Central Administrative
Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench and prayed to direct the appellants to convene
meeting of the Selection Committee for considering his case for selection and
appointment to Indian Forest Service cadre 5 against the substantive vacancies
available as on January 1, 2006.
4. On service of notice, the
appellants contested the claim of the respondent No. 1 by filing reply. The
Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, by judgment dated March 9,
2007, directed the State of Kerala and the Principal Secretary Forests,
Government of Kerala, to submit the consolidated proposal for considering the
selection to Indian Forest Service for the year 2006 to the UPSC within a
period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the said order.
The Tribunal further directed that
on receipt of such proposal, the UPSC, New Delhi and the Selection Committee
for selection to Indian Forest Service shall convene a meeting well before the
date of retirement of the respondent No. 1, which was May 31, 2007 in
accordance with the Rues.
5. The record indicates that the
above mentioned directions were not complied with by the appellants. Therefore,
the respondent No. 1 6 moved M.A. No. 649 of 2007 in O.A. No. 26 of 2007 and
prayed to initiate contempt proceedings against the appellants for
non-compliance of directions dated March 9, 2007 given by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in O.A. No. 26 of 2007.
6. The Tribunal issued notice to
the appellants. On receipt of the notice, the appellants filed their reply.
Meanwhile, proposals were received from Principal Secretary Forests, Government
of Kerala and the State of Kerala. After hearing the learned counsel for the
parties, the Tribunal, by judgment dated September 11, 2007, directed the UPSC,
New Delhi to convene the Selection Committee meeting based on the proposals
already received from the State Government by letters dated May 10, 2007 and
June 15, 2007 for considering the case of respondent No. 1 for promotion to
Indian Forest Service without waiting for the further proposals in respect of 7
additional vacancies which had arisen and disposed of M.A. No. 649 of 2007.
7. Feeling aggrieved the
appellants invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of High Court of Kerala at
Ernakulam under Article 226 of the Constitution by filing W.P. (C) No. 30695 of
2007 and prayed to set aside the directions given by the Tribunal in M.A. No.
649 of 2007, which was filed in O.A. No. 26 of 2007.
8. The High Court of Kerala at
Ernakulam has dismissed the petition filed by the appellants vide judgment
dated October 18, 2007, giving rise to the instant appeal.
9. This Court has heard the
learned counsel for the parties at length and in great detail. This Court has also
considered the documents forming part of the instant appeal.
10. One of the grounds of
challenge urged in the memorandum of special leave petition is that no harm or
prejudice would be caused to the 8 respondent No. 1, i.e., Mr. A.K. Salim if
the Select list is prepared for all the three vacancies because according to
the appellants, the Tribunal has already directed to regularize services of the
respondent No. 1 till the date of consideration of his case for promotion to
Indian Forest Service by the Selection Committee, if he is ultimately found to
be eligible though he has already retired on May 31, 2007 and, therefore, the
judgment of the High Court, impugned in appeal, should be set aside. On service
of notice, the respondent No. 1 has filed counter affidavit on January 11, 2008
wherein he has stated that he has no objection if selection proceedings for the
three vacancies for the year 2006 are initiated. During the course of hearing
of instant appeal Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel for the appellants
as well as Dr. Sumant Bhardwaj, learned advocate for the respondent No. 1 and
Mr. B. Dutta, learned Additional Solicitor General for Government of India,
have stated at the Bar that the instant 9 appeal may be disposed of by
directing the appellant No. 2, i.e., the Selection Committee through UPSC to
convene the meeting for considering the case of respondent No. 1 and others for
the three vacancies which had arisen in the year 2006 and that the case of the
respondent No. 1 be considered in the said meeting.
11. In view of the consensus
arrived at between the parties, the appellant No. 2, i.e., the Selection
Committee through UPSC, is directed to convene the meeting for considering the
case of the respondent No. 1 and other eligible candidates for promotion to
Indian Forest Services within two months from today. In case the respondent No.
1 is selected for induction into Indian Forest Service, the intervening period
shall be regularized notionally with effect from June 1, 2007 and the
respondent No. 1 shall be accorded all benefits including monetary benefits.
The 10 appeal is allowed only to the extent indicated hereinabove.
12. There shall be no orders as to
costs.
............................J.
[Tarun Chatterjee]
............................J.
[J.M. Panchal] New Delhi;
May 16, 2008.
Back
Pages: 1 2 3
