9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 587X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs in the State Service. Respondents nos. 1 to 4 in Civil Appeal No 6525 of 1994 are the direct recruits to the Indian Administrative Service. These respondents - direct recruit IAS officers had filed OA No. 118 of 1994, challenging the Notifications of the Government of Indian dated 15.12.1993 and 16.12.1993, as already stated. Another direct recruit IAS officer had filed OA No 542 of 1994 and yet another direct recruit IAS officer had filed OA No. 543 of 1994 and all the three OAs were disposed of together by the Tribunal by order dated 26.8.1994. Though the dispute essentially centers round the year of allotment in the cadre of Indian Administrative Service between the direct recruits and the promotees but the said dispute arises because of several earlier orders passed by the Tribunals and the two Notifications were issued by the Union Government in implementation of the directions of the Tribunal. It would, therefore, be necessary to set out facts in brief. The appellants were initially recruited to the post of Deputy Collectors in the State of Andhra Pradesh and were appointed by order dated 29.12.1978 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. On getting posting orders i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 and 5 were promoted w.e.f 16.12.1988. The 13th man in the Select List was not promoted as certain enquiry against him was pending. The 14th man, one Shri Ram Chandra Murthy filed an application before the Tribunal, which was registered as OA No 223 of 1989, claiming that he was entitled to be promoted against 13th vacancy. That application was allowed by the Tribunal and special Leave Petition against said judgment by the Union of Indian stood dismissed. He was, therefore, appointed to the Indian Administrative service w.e.f 16.12.1988 the date on which the vacancy was available. In the meantime, the State Tribunal heard the Petitions filed before the Tribunal by the Promotes and by Order dated 22.3.1988 quashed G.O.M No 493 dated 8.4.11982 and held that the services of the Deputy Collectors has to be reckoned from the date of their appointment and the case of such of the Deputy Collectors who had not been considered for being included in the Select List of IAS of 1987 on account of non completion of 8 years of service by 1.1.1987 should be reconsidered. In implementation of the aforesaid direction of the Tribunal Government order was issued on 31.5.1990 regularising services of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 14 persons of the State Civil Services to the Indian Administrative Service who were brought into the Select List of the year 1987 by the Review Selection Committee. A Review Petition appears to have been filed by the State Government at the instance of the Central Government before the Tribunal and Contempt petition also have been filed by the present appellants before the Tribunal but all those petitions were disposed of by the Tribunal on a finding that the directions of the Tribunal have been duly complied with and the earlier order of the Tribunal does not contain any error on the face of the order requiring to be reviewed. The direct recruit IAS officers being aggrieved by the Notifications of the Government of Indian 15.12.1993 and 16.12.1993, approached the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Said Tribunal by the impugned order dated 26 August, 1994, having allowed the same and having quashed the Notification, the present appeals have been preferred. Mr. Salve the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants contended that the Notification dated 15.12.1993 though purports to be an amendment to the Regulation but the same having been issued in exercise of power ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o accommodate the promote officers in the IAS and in such special situation the Central Government has exercised powers under Section 3(1) of the Act itself, and therefore, the Notification issued in exercise of such power could not have been struck down by the Tribunal. Mr. P.P. Rao the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, who were the direct recruit IAS officers, on the other hand submitted that under the scheme of service rules and regulations determining the service conditions of employees in the Indian Administrative Service cadre, it is not possible to read a particular Notification in isolation. According to Mr. Rao, Section 3(1) of the Act confers power on the Central Government to make rules regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to the All Indian Service. In exercise of such power the Central Government has made the Recruitment Rules of 1954, which prohibits promotion of the number of persons from State Civil Service to the cadre of IAS in excess of 33 1/3 per cent of the posts shown in items 1 and 2 of the cadre in relation to the State in question. The Central Government has also made, in exercise of power un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en struck down. Mr Rao, lastly urged that under the scheme of the Service Rules and Regulations meant for IAS Only 13 persons could have been in the Select List for the year 1987 for being promoted to the IAS but effect of the impugned Notification dated 15.12.1993 and the consequent Notification dated 16.12.1993 is that the Select List for the year 1987 for promotion to the IAS consists of 40 persons which contravenes the Recruitment Rules, and therefore, the impugned Notifications have rightly been struck down. Mr. Venkat Ramani, the learned senior counsel appearing for some of the respondents, submitted that the Notification issued by the Central Government must be read as the language of the Notification indicates and not on the basis of the source of power in exercise of which the Notification has been issued and thus construed it is an amendment to the Cadre Strength Regulation and if the said Regulation contravenes Rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules the same cannot be allowed to operate and the Tribunal has rightly quashed the same. In support of this contention the learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of MOHINDER SINGH GILL ANR. Vs. THE CHI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the two All Indian Services were formed and they were put on statutory basis under the Indian Civil Administrative Service Cadre Rules, 1950. The Parliament then passed the All Indian Services Act, 1951 under Article 312(1) of the Constitution which empowers the Government of Indian to make after consultation with the State Government, rules for the regulation of recruitment and conditions of service of the persons appointed to an All Indian Service. In exercise of poser under Section 3 of the Act - The Recruitment Rules, The Cadre Rules, The All Indian Services (Conditions of Service - Residuary matters) Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Residuary Rules) have been made by the Central Government. The Cadre Rules enables the Central Government to determine the strength and composition of the cadre in each State by framing regulation and in exercise of such power the Cadre Strength Regulation, 1955 has been framed by the Central Government and not only the total authorised strength of the cadre for each State has been indicated but also in indicates the number of post for different categories of posts within the cadre. Thus, the Act, the Rules and the Regulation are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld attempt to make a harmonious construction and try to save the provisions and not to strike down the same. But where it is not possible even with doing some amount of violence to the language used in the notification to give a harmonious construction,, then necessarily the court will have no other option than to set aside a notification if the said notification contravenes any provisions of the Act or the Rule or is otherwise constitutionally invalid. Bearing in mind the aforesaid principle of construction it appears to us that the impugned amended Regulation cannot be harmoniously construed with Rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules. Under the Recruitment Rules recruitment to the Indian Administrative Service can be made by competitive examination; by selection of persons from among the Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers of the Armed Forces of the Union; by promotion of member of a State Civil Service; and by selection, in special cases from among the persons who hold in a substantive capacity gazetted posts in connection with the affairs of a State and who are not members of a State Civil Service. So far as the promotion of members of a State Civi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. The Tribunal, therefore, was fully justified in striking down the notification dated 15 or December, 1993. So far as the third question is concerned, the same is in relation to the arguments advanced by the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of Indian as well as Mr. Salve appearing for the appellants - who are officer of the State Civil Service that since those officers were illegally excluded from consideration when Select List of the year 1987 was drawn up, they had approached the Tribunal and Tribunal having issued directions in their favour the said direction had to be implemented and if on implementation of the same the Government of Indian has issued the impugned notification, the said notification must be sustained. In other words, the argument proceeds on the ground that the valuable right accrued in favour of the officers of the State Civil Services who were kept out of consideration for promotion when the Select List of the year 1987 was brawn up cannot be taken away by striking down the impugned notification under which supernumerary posts were created and promotions were given to those State Civil Service Officers from the date their juni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1987 the Central Government could have promoted only the first 13 of the list as the number of posts which could be filled up from amongst the officers belonging to the State Civil Service in the year 1987 was only 13. But instead of following the aforesaid method the State Government and Union Government proceeded to recruit by promotion all those who were included in the Select List of the year 1987. Such act on the part of the Central Government and the State Government is contrary to the provisions of the integrated scheme of the Rules and Regulations governing the service conditions of the officers belonging to the Indian Administrative service and therefore it was wholly beyond the competence of the Central Government to issue the notification date 15.12.1993 increasing the cadre strength in relation to these promote officers as well as the notification dated 16.12.1993 promoting these officers to the Indian Administrative Service. Necessarily therefore, the said two notifications must be held to be invalid and inoperative and have rightly been struck down by the Tribunal. In view of the aforesaid conclusions arrived at we do not find any infirmity with the order of the Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
