9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (3) TMI 370X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ations from in-service candidates for recruitment to 50 posts of Tehsildars. Para- graph 3 of the Notification specified details of the posts reserved for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward classes including 10% of posts set apart for Ex-Military Personnel. According to the figures specified, therein, out of 50 posts of Tehsildars, 5 posts were reserved for Ex-Military Personnel, 7 posts for Schedule Castes, 1 post for Schedule Tribes and 13 posts for other Backward classes. Paragraph 3 of the advertisement stated that in the event of non-availability of sufficient number of candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes. Scheduled Tribes and other Backward classes or Ex- Military personnel, for filing to the reserved vacancies, such vacancies shall be filled up as per Rules in force. The Notification further gave details of the written and viva voce examinations. Para 14 of the Notification stated that the provisions of 1975 Rules and Rules 7 to 14 of the Karna- taka Recruitment of Gazetted Probationers (Class I and II posts Appointment by Competitive Examination) Rules 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 1966 Rules), shall mutatis mutandis apply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward classes, on the ground that the same was inconsistent with the statutory Rule 10 of 1966 Rules and further on the ground that the directions contained therein were violative of Articles 16(1) and 16(4) of the Constitution Of India. The High Court rejected both the contentions holding that the directions contained in the Government Order dated 9th July 1975 were not violative of Rule 10(2) and there was no violation of Article 16 of the Constitution. The High Court upheld the Government Order dated 23rd April 1976 directing the Commission to prepare the select list afresh in accordance with the mode pre- scribed under the Government Order dated 9th July 1975. Learned counsel for the appellants did not pursue the challenge relating to the validity of the Government Order dated 9th July 1975 before us instead he assailed the validity of the State Government's Order dated 23rd April 1976 directing the Commission to prepare a revised list in accordance with the Government Order dated 9th July 1975, on the ground the Government Order was not applicable to the selection. 'Learned counsel for the appellants urge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 Rules shall mutatis mutandis apply to conduct of competitive examination and the provisions of Karnataka State Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules 1957 shall apply in respect of matters for which no provision is made in the Rules. The aforesaid Rules do not prescribe any procedure for preparation of select list or for making reservations but in view of Rule 5 the provisions of other Rules are made applicable. Rule 10 of the Karnataka Rules 1966 which provides for reservations for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward classes was applicable in view of Rule 5 of 1975 Rules. Rule 10 of 1966 Rules is as under: 10. Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes--(1) There shall be reservation of vacancies for candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes to the extent provided for by the Government by any general or special orders. (2) In filling the vacancies to reserved, candidates who are members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and other Backward Classes shall be considered for appointment in the order of merit in which their names appear in the list of successful candi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment Order dated 6th September 1969. It is not necessary to go into the details of the two modes as there is no dispute that the Commission had followed the procedure as prescribed under Annexure ? to the Government. Order dated 6th September 1969 and the list, so prepared was not approved by the State Government as it was of the opinion that the Commission should have followed the mode of selection as contained in Annexure 2 to the Government Order dated 9th July 1975 in preparing the select list. It appears that the Commission insisted before the State Government that in view of Para II of the Government Order dated 9th July 1975 reservations made in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward classes already notified before the issue of Government Order dated 9th July 1975 remain unchanged therefore the provisions of the Government Order dated 6th September 1969 had to be followed both in regard to reservations and the mode of selection. The State Government by its Order dated 23rd April 1976 refused to accept the Commission's plea and it directed the Commission to prepare a revised list in accordance with the provisions of Government Order dated 9th J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 6th September 1969 but while superseding those orders provision was made in para 11 to save the selection which was pending. Para 11 clearly stated that though earlier Government Orders laying down percentage of reservation required to be made in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other Backward classes including the mode of selection in preparing the select list, stood superseded, but it saved the reservations made for any category of post or service in respect of which advertisement had already been issued before the issue of the Government Order dated 9th July 1975. This follows from the expression reservations already made for any category of posts or service and advertised before the issue of this Government Order shall be deemed to have been validly made . These directions stipulated that where reservations were already made and advertisement had been issued, and the selection was pending on 9th July 1975, the same shall remain unaffected and the selection shall be made in accordance with the earlier Government Orders, and the same shall be treated to have been made validly. Para 11 is in the nature of a saving clause, its object and purpose, was to save the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cations for direct recruitment to a category of posts, and the advertisement expressly states that selection shall be made in accordance with the existing Rules or Government Orders, and if it further indicates the extent of reservations in favour of various categories, the selection of candidates in such a case must be made in accordance with the then existing Rules and Government Orders. Candidates who apply, and undergo written or viva voce test acquire vested right for being considered for selections in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in the advertisement, unless the advertisement itself indicates a contrary intention. Generally, a candidate has right to be considered in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in the advertisement as his right crystalises on the date of publication of advertisement, however he has no absolute right in the matter. If the recruitment Rules are amended retrospectively during the pendency of selection, in that event selection must be held in accordance with the amended Rules. Whether the Rules have retrospective effect or not, primarily depends upon the language of the Rules and its construction to ascertain the legislat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interviews and recommending the names having been followed in accordance with the then existing Rules prior to the enforcement of the amended Rules the appointments made on the basis of the recommendation made by the Public Service Commission could not be rendered invalid. In Y.V. Rangaiah v.J. Sreenivasa Rao, [1983] 3 SCC 285 similar Question arose relating to recruitment by promotion. The question was whether promotion should be made in accordance with the Rules, in force on the date the vacancies occurred or in accordance with the amended Rules. The Court observed as under: The vacancies which occurred prior to the amended rules would be governed by the old rules and not by the amended rules. It is admitted by counsel for both the parties that henceforth promotion to the post of Sub-Registrar Grade II will be according to the new rules on the zonal basis and not on the State wise basis and, therefore, there was no question of challenging the new rules. But the question is of filling the vacancies that occurred prior to the amended rules. We have not the slightest doubt that the posts which fell vacant prior to the amended rules would be governed by the old rules and not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Court and direct the State Government to appoint the appellants to the posts of Tehsildars, on the basis of additional list published by the Commission on 18th March 1976. During the pendency of the writ petition before the High Court, appointments were made to the posts of Tehsildars on the basis of the revised list prepared by the Commission in accordance with the directions of the State Government dated 23rd April 1976. Pursuant to the interim direction of the High Court the appointment orders contained a specific term that the appointments would be subject to the result of the writ petition filed by the appellants. Since the appellants have succeeded, the respondents' appointment is liable to be set aside. The respondents have been working for a period of about 14 years, it would cause great hardship to them if their appointment is quashed, and they are directed to vacate the office which they have been holding during all these years. At the same time the appellants have been wrongly denied their right to the posts of Tehsildars. Having regard to these facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that it would be expedient in the interest of justice not to interfere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
