SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- M.B. Shah and R.P. Sethi, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 1667 of 1997. D/d. 7.9.1999.

Sunder Lal - Appellant

Versus

Union of India and others - Respondents

Promotion - Constitution of - Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC - Composition thereof - Statutory rule for the constitution of a Departmental Promotion Committee provides that the Committee shall consist of three members, i.e. (i) Chairman/Member, UPSC-Chairman; (ii) Secretary, Legislative Department - Member; and (iii) Additional Secretary, Legislative Department-Member - The office memorandum dated 10-4-1989 also specifically provides that if none of the officers included in DPC as per the composition given in the recruitment rules is an SC or ST officer, it would be in order to co-opt a member belonging to the SC or ST, if available within the ministry/department - The Secretary, Legislative Department himself was belonging to a Scheduled Caste, addition of the fourth member in the Committee was not justified - Tribunal arrived at conclusion that the constitution of a Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion to the grades of Joint Secretary and Legislative Counsel was against the statutory rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution - CAT rightly held composition of DPC against statutory rules - Appeal is dismissed.

[Paras 2 and 7]

ORDER

M.B. Shah, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 17-9-1996 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA No. 2084 of 1995. By the impugned order, the Tribunal arrived at a conclusion that the constitution of a Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion to the grades of Joint Secretary and Legislative Counsel (Hindi Branch) was against the statutory rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution.

3. As per the State statutory rules, constitution of a Departmental Promotion Committee should consist of:

(i)	Chairman/Member	UPSC	Chairman
(ii)	Secretary	Legislative Department	M/o Law & Justice	Member
(iii)	Additional Secretary Official Languages Wing	Legislative Department	M/o Law & Justice	Member

4. Office memorandum dated 10-4-1989 issued by the Government of India while issuing guidelines on Departmental Promotion Committees provides as under:

"2.7. In Group A and Group B services/posts if none of the officers included in DPC as per the composition given in the recruitment rules is an SC or ST officer, it would be in order to co-opt a member belonging to the SC or ST if available within the ministry/department. If no such officer is available within the ministry/department, he may be taken from another ministry/department."

5. Despite this, as per the office order dated 9-8-1995, the Departmental Promotion Committee for various Group ?A? and ?B? posts in the Official Languages Wing, Legislative Department, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs was constituted as follows:

(A)For promotion to the grades of Joint Secretary and Legislative Counsel (Hindi Branch):

(a)	Chairman/Member	Union Public Service Commission	Chairman
(b)	Secretary	Legislative Department	Member
(c)	Additional Secretary	Legislative Department	Member
(d)	An officer of the appropriate level belonging to a Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe to be co-opted from any other ministry/department		Member

6. Before the Tribunal, it was pointed out that the addition of the 4th member was not necessary in view of the fact that the Secretary, Legislative Department himself was belonging to a Scheduled Caste and there was no necessity of co-opting for the 4th member.

7. In our view, the finding given by the Tribunal cannot be said to be in any way illegal or erroneous. Statutory rule for the constitution of a Departmental Promotion Committee provides that the Committee shall consist of three named members, i.e. (i) Chairman/Member, UPSC ? Chairman; (ii) Secretary, Legislative Department ? Member; and (iii) Additional Secretary, Legislative Department ? Member. The office memorandum dated 10-4-1989 also specifically provides that if none of the officers included in DPC as per the composition given in the recruitment rules is an SC or ST officer, it would be in order to co-opt a member belonging to the SC or ST, if available within the ministry/department. In view of the admitted fact that the Secretary, Legislative Department himself was belonging to a Scheduled Caste, addition of the fourth member in the Committee was not justified.

8. Therefore, in our view, the order passed by the Tribunal is just and in accordance with the statutory rules.

The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

Appeal dismissed.