SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- Sujata V. Manohar, K. Venkataswami and M. Jagannadha Rao, JJ.

Civil Appeals Nos. 5783-86 of 1994. D/d. 26.11.1998.

C. Radhakrishnan Pillai and another - Appellants

Versus

Union of India and others - Respondents

Promotion - State/zone-wise promotion - The qualifying examination is held on an all -India basis - Juniors in other States who had passed the same departmental examination were promoted as Head Clerks much earlier - Held on facts, seniors not entitled to promotion from earlier dates - Relevant rules prescribing promotions within a State/group of States - Appellants got promotions after their juniors in another State - However, in view of the Recruitment Rules, those who qualify in this examination have to be given promotion States wise or group of State wise - Held, appellants not entitled to promotion from earlier dates.

[Paras 3 to 6]

ORDER

Sujata V. Manohar, J. - The appellants were recruited in 1978 as Clerks in All-India Radio. They appeared for departmental examination which qualified them for promotion as Head Clerks/Accountants/Senior Storekeepers. The qualifying examination is held on an all-India basis.

2. After passing the departmental examination and thus qualifying for promotion the appellants were promoted as Head Clerks sometime in the years 1984 or 1985. The appellants filed an application before the Madras Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal claiming that their juniors in other States who had passed the same departmental examination were promoted as Head Clerks much earlier and hence, they should also be promoted from earlier dates. This contention has been negatived by the Tribunal and hence the present appeals have been filed.

3. Our attention is drawn to the Recruitment Rules for the post of Head Clerks/Accountants in All-India Radio which are annexed to the memorandum of the Government of India, Directorate General, All-India Radio, and dated 4-3-1970. In clause (2) of this memorandum it is stated that promotions and transfers of Head Clerks/Accountants which were hitherto being made on all-India basis will hereafter be made within a State or group of States as indicated in these revised Recruitment Rules. The rules further provide that Departmental Promotions Committee in respect of offices falling in a single State for which a common seniority list will be maintained, will be held by the Station Director of the major station falling in that State. Some of the States have been grouped together for this purpose. Under the memorandum, Pondicherry and Andaman and Nicobar Islands have been grouped together. The appellants fall within this group. As per the said memorandum a common seniority list has to be maintained in respect of all eligible candidates falling in this group of States and their promotion to the post of Head Clerk will be made within that group of States. It is in view of these revised Recruitment Rules that the appellants were given promotion as Head Clerks in the order of their seniority in this group of States in 1984 and 1985. The fact that other Clerks falling in any other State or other group of States got promotion in their group earlier is, therefore, not relevant looking to the Recruitment Rules for the promotion of Head Clerks.

4. The Madras Bench of the Tribunal in the impugned order has also observed that the matters relating to promotion to the cadre of Head Clerks and seniority in that cadre have become settled matters for over a decade and the appellants cannot be allowed to unsettle these settled matters after such a lapse of time.

5. The appellants, however, have drawn our attention to a judgment of the Cuttack Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal which decided the question in their favour. The Cuttack Bench, however, so decided the matter because, as it has observed in its judgment and order, the respondents before that Bench had not produced any evidence to the effect that the cadre of Head Clerks was not an all-India cadre. The Cuttack Bench also observed that in the seniority list, the names were shown on an all-India basis. As the Madras Bench has observed, the list which was produced before the Cuttack Bench was not a common seniority list but only a common eligibility list. The decision of the Cuttack Bench, therefore, was not correct since the relevant documents were not produced before it.

6. Our attention was also drawn by the appellants to a memorandum dated 15-2-1978 for holding a departmental examination for making promotion to the post of Head Clerk-cum-Accountant in All-India Radio. There is no dispute that the departmental examination which is held as a qualifying examination for promotion to the post of Head Clerk is a common examination for all candidates all over India. However, in view of the Recruitment Rules, those who qualify in this examination have to be given promotion States wise or group of State wise. The memorandum of 15-2-1978, therefore, does not help the appellants.

7. In the premises, we agree with the reasoning and conclusion reached by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed.

There will, however, be no order as to costs.

Appeals dismissed.