No Distinction Between Time Served Before Or After Acquisition Of Degree So Long It’s Basis For Consideration Of Promotion: SC
The Supreme Court while deciding a batch of appeals has reiterated that there is no distinction between the time period served before or after the acquisition of the degree so long as it is the basis for consideration of the promotion.
The three-Judge Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Abhay S. Oka, and Justice Manoj Misra observed, “… we uphold the view taken by the High Court opining that there is no distinction between the time period served before or after the acquisition of the degree so long as the degree is acquired and is the basis for consideration of the promotion. We are, thus, of the view that for all the aforesaid reasons for the Department in question, the view taken in D. Stephen Joseph is held to be applicable law, and we answer the reference accordingly.”
The Bench while referring to its various judgments noted that if someone acquires a higher degree as compared to a diploma, he/she comes into a channel which entitles consideration, albeit on merit, in a fast lane with less number of years of service required in the cadre.
Advocates Raghavendra S. Srivatsa, Venkita Subramoniam, and Likhi Chand Bonsle appeared on behalf of the appellants while Advocates Anurag Dubey, Anjali Tiwari, and Bhupendra Kumar Bharadwaj appeared on behalf of the respondents.
Brief Facts -
The appellants had joined the service as Junior Engineers in the Electricity Department of the Government of Puducherry, having already acquired an Engineering Degree prior to the appointment to the post of Junior Engineer while the respondents joined the service as Junior Engineers with a Diploma and, in the course of service, obtained an Engineering Degree. According to the Rules, for the post of Junior Engineer, 50% of the vacancies are to be filled by promotion, and the remaining 50% are to be filled by direct recruitment.
The appellants approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) challenging the decision of the Puducherry administration to promote the Junior Engineers, who were originally Diploma holders as they were alleged to have denied the promotion. The question before the Apex Court was whether, for a Diploma holder, who acquires a degree during the course of employment, the period of service as a Junior Engineer prior to acquiring the degree is to be excluded from computing the eligible period of service for promotion to the post of an Assistant Engineer.
The Supreme Court in view of the aforesaid question noted, “In our view, one of the important aspects is the wording of the Rule itself. According to the Rules, 50 percent of the promotion quota is from Junior Engineers with three years of regular service in the grade “and” possessing a degree in Electrical Engineering. The Rule does not say from which date the time period of regular service has to be counted, but there is a twin requirement of three years of regular service as also a degree. As against this, the second scheme of 50 percent promotion from Junior Engineers uses the word “with” seven years of regular service in the grade and possessing a diploma in Electrical Engineering.”
The Court said that accepting the plea of the appellant would amount to insertion into the requirement of the Rules, which is not stipulated.
“… this is how the Rule has been understood by the Department, the framers of the Rules, and accordingly, the Rules have been uniformly implemented in the Electricity Department over a period of time. In view of the above, due weightage must be given to the view of the framers of the Rules”, asserted the Court.
Accordingly, the Apex Court dismissed the appeals.
Cause Title- T. Valsan (D) Thr. LRs. & Ors. v. K. Kanagaraj & Ors.
