Council Of Scientific And ... vs Shri Chander Bhan And Shri ...
2002 Latest Caselaw 2060 Del

JUDGMENT

Anil Dev Singh, J.

1. By this writ petition, the petitioners-Council for Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) and Central Road research Institute (CRRI) challenge the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated March, 21, 2001 in O.A. No. 2576/1999 whereby the order dated July 23, 1999 of the second petitioner-CRRI was set aside and the petitioners were directed to consider the case of the respondents herein, applicants in the O.A., for faster track promotion under the "New Recruitment and Assessment Scheme" (NRAS), and to take a decision thereon as per the criteria fixed by the petitioners. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as follows:-

2. The first respondent and the second respondent are possessed of Masters Degree in Economics. While the first respondent obtained the Masters Degree in the year 1974, the second respondent secured the same in the year 1975. The CRRI on the basis of the recommendations of a duly constituted selection committee appointed the first respondent and the second respondent to the post of Field Assistants in the scale in Rs. 260-430 vide office orders No. 57 and 114 dated January 1, 1979 and June 19, 1979, respectively. The appointments of the first respondent and the second respondent were made in the project called "Road User cost Study in India" (for short 'the RUCS'). On October 29, 1980, the first respondent and the second respondent were promoted on probation to the scale of Rs. 380-640 by the CRRI in the RUCS project. On the completion of the RUCS project supernumerary posts were created vide order dated March 26, 1984 in the CRRI to absorb the staff employed in the RUCS project. The posts were created w.e.f. April 1, 1984. Vide office orders dated March, 31, 1984, the respondents were appointed as Technicians Grade II w.e.f. April 1, 1984 in the CRRI. The office orders, inter alia, provided as follows:-

"xx xx xx

2. Wherever a regular post offered is lower than the scheme post held by him, the service rendered in the scheme post will court for the purpose of assessment promotion in the lower post in accordance with the decision of the Governing Body as contained in CSIR Circular dated 13-1-1981. Otherwise this regular appointment being offered is in(?) the nature of a fresh appointment effective from 1-4-1984.

3. His/her appointment is under the CSIR which is an autonomous body.

4. His/her appointment is temporary but is likely to continue. He/she will be on probation for a period of one/two year(s) which may be extended or curtailed at the discretion of the competent authority. During the period of probation, extended or otherwise the appointment may be terminated at any time without notice.

xx xx xx"

Thereafter, by circular dated July 31, 1986, the CSIR conveyed its decision to the erstwhile staff of RUCS Project to accept any of the following two options:-

  "xx                xx              xx

 

 Option-1

 

The RUCS staff may remain in the same posts as offered to them by the Director, CRRI keeping in view their qualifications and experience, on the following conditions:-

i) If some of them have been shown against supernumerary posts, they will be absorbed against regular posts as and when these become available in due course.

ii) their post service in the project will be counted for the purpose of assessment.

Option-2

They may continue to hold the same posts which they held in the project on the following conditions:-

i) If regular posts commensurate with their qualification and experience were available in CRRI on 1/4/1984 or became available thereafter and are still vacant, all the person who can be absorbed against these posts may be taken on regular establishment w.e.f. 1-4-84 or the date of availability of the posts as the case may be.

ii) If the regular vacant post which were available as on 01.04.1984 or became available thereafter against which the project staff could be absorbed as in (1) above, have since bee filled up, corresponding supernumerary posts will be created and the persons concerned shown against them. They will be brought over to regular posts as and when these become available. The period of their appointment against these supernumerary posts will count for assessment purpose.

iii) For those ex-employees of RUCS project for whom regular posts are not so far available as in (i) (ii) above, shadow posts in terms of Ministry of Finance O.M. No. F.8(4)EG.I/61 dated 19.8.1961 will be created and the persons concerned shown against these posts. While holding the shadow posts, they will not be supplied to any assessment as to duties are attached to such shadow posts and these shadow posts are not comparable with supernumerary posts which are created under the operation of Bye-laws where the lower regular posts on promotion of the incumbers are kept in abeyance and they continue to perform the assigned duties. Absorption of such person against regular posts in the Institute will be done as and when regular posts commensurate with their qualifications and experience become available in CRRI in accordance with the CSIR letter dt. 13.1.1981 without any further interview.

xx xx xx"

In response to the aforesaid circular, the respondents exercised their options.

3. On June 2, 1987, the CSIR conveyed its sanction for creation of fourteen shadow posts for the erstwhile staff of RUCS Project in CRRI. Pursuant to the aforesaid circular of June 2, 1987, the respondents were appointed as Technicians Grade VI w.e.f April 1, 1984 in the regular establishment of CRRI. The posts were required to be abolished as soon as the regular posts were available. Subsequently, by Office Memo dated February 18, 1988, the CRRI absorbed fifteen RUCS Project staff including the resondents against the regular vacant posts w.e.f. September 16, 1987. It was specifically stated in the office memo dated February 18, 1988 that the shadow posts stood abolished on the absorption of the ex-RUCS staff on the regular posts of CRRI. On July 18, 1988 the CSIR decided that the services rendered by an employee of CRRI prior to April 1, 1984 will count for assessment purposes in the case of an employee who had opted for option No. 2 except the period which he/she had served against the shadow post. The Director, CRRI, on the recommendations of the assessment committee approved the promotions of the first and the second respondents to the post of Technician Grade VIII, Group-II(3) in the grade of Rs. 1,400-2,300 w.e.f. June 15, 1991 and October 30, 1987, respectively under the NRAS circulated vide CSIR letter dated November 2, 1981. The promotions of the first respondent and the second respondent were made vide office orders dated September 9, 1994 and September 23, 1992, respectively. On March 10, 1999, another development took place. The CRRI approved the protection of seniority of the first respondent and effect was given to the assessment promotion as Technician Grade VIII, Group II(3) in the pay of Rs. 1,400-2,300 w.e.f. October 30, 1987 and as Senior Technical Assistant Group II(4) under MANAS in the pay scale of Rs. 1,640,2,900 w.e.f. October 30, 1994. By a separate order the CRRI also approved the assessment promotion of respondent No. 2 to the scale of Rs 1,640-2,900 as Senior Technical Assistant Group II(4) w.e.f. October 30, 1994. It needs to be noted that the NRAS came into force w.e.f. February 1, 1981. After the seniority of the respondents was protected and they were given assessment promotion by office memo dated March, 10, 1999, the respondents submitted their representations seeking 'faster track promotion'. The representations did not evoke a favorable response and the same were rejected by the petitioners by office memo dated July 23, 1999. The respondents being aggrieved by the office memorandum dated July 23, 1999 filed O.A. No. 2576/1999 before the Central Administrative Tribunal with the prayer to quash office memorandum dated July 23, 1999 and to issue a direction to the petitioners to consider the respondents for promotion under 'faster track promotion scheme' from the date they became eligible with consequential benefits. The Central Administrative Tribunal on hearing the parties accepted the O.A. of the respondents by its order dated March, 21, 2001. While accepting the O.A. the Central Administrative Tribunal quashed and set aside the office memorandum dated July 23, 1999 and directed the petitioners to consider the case of the first and second respondents for promotion under 'faster track assessment scheme' and to take a decision thereon in accordance with the prescribed criteria. The petitioners being aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal has filed the instant writ petition.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The basic question involved in this petition is whether or not the respondents are entitled to 'fast track promotion' as per the NRAS. The answer to the question lies in para 0.4.9 of the NRAS dated November 2, 1981 and letters of the CSIR dated November 24, 1982, February 26, 1983, March 5, 1983, August 17, 1984 and November 16, 1984. As per para 0.4.9 of the NRAS, 'faster track promotion' was available to the incumbents who had got the prescribed entry level qualifications for the next higher group and whose appointments were made between February 1, 1981 and November 2, 1981. The entire position with regard to 'faster track promotion' has been crystallised in the letter of the CSIR dated November 16, 1984. Therefore, except letter of the CSIR dated November 16, 1984, no other aforesaid needs to be quoted. Letter of the CSIR dated November 16, 1984 reads as under:-

"Subject: Assessment promotion under the New Recruitment & Assessment Scheme-Eligibility for Faster Track Promotion.

.....

Sir,

I am directed to state that in accordance with the provision contained in para 0.4.9 of the New Recruitment and Assessment Scheme, a Faster Track Promotion was available to the present incumbents who had got the prescribed entry level qualifications for the next higher group. It was also stipulated that this provision will also apply to the appointments made between 1.2.1981 and the date of issue of those orders (i.e. 2.11.1981). The orders mentioned above were circulated vide CSIR letter No. 17(65)/81-E.II dated 2nd November, 1981. The Governing Body of the CSIRT approved of certain modifications to the New Recruitment and Assessment Scheme on the recommendations of the Committee headed by Dr. Thyagarajan. These decisions were conveyed to all the Laboratories of the CSIR vide CSIR letter No. 17(65)/82-CTE.PPS.Vol.II dated 24th November, 1982. In sub-para (iv) appearing on page 3 of the letter dated 24.11.1982, it was stipulated that the persons possessing M.Sc./B.E. or equivalent qualifications if appointed in this Group will not be eligible for consideration for assessment to posts in Group-IV which was meant for scientific staff. This orders contained in CSIR letter dated 24.11.1982 were made effective from 1.2.1981.

Attention is also invited to the clarification issued vide para 5 of the CSIR letter No. 17(65)/83-CTE.PPS.Vol.IV dated 26.2.1983 which reads as under:-

"The Scientific and Technical Staff as on 2.11.1981 who hold M.Sc. or B.E. or equivalent degree will move to Group-IV on promotion to the grade of RS. 700-1300 irrespective of the fact whether they are holding scientific or technical posts. The staff appointed to various entry level posts now introduced in Group-III on or after 24.11.1982 will remain in Group-III even if they hold M.Sc./B.E. Degree and shall be eligible for assessment promotion grade by grade in Group-III."

In this connection attention is also invited to the decision conveyed vide CSIR No. 17(65)/83-E.II.PPS dated 5th March, 1983 conveying the decision of the Governing Body that the benefit of Faster Track Promotion would also be admissible to such of the scientific and technical staff as were appointed to entry and non-entry level posts up to 31st December, 1981 and possessed the prescribed entry-level qualifications for the next higher Group of grades subject to the conditions laid down in the New Recruitment and Assessment Scheme and the instructions issued there under from time to time.

The benefit of Faster Track was also extended to the staff who had been selected up to 31.12.1981 but who could not join their respective posts for want of completion of certain essential formalities, e.g., verification of character and antecedents, examination by competent medical authority by the above stipulated date.

Further it has been decided by CSIR with the concurrence of F.A. To CSIR vide CSIR letter of even number dated 17th Aug., 1984 that the staff who were in position as on 1.2.1981 and had acquired the qualifications prescribed for the next higher group of grades up to 31.12.1981 will also be eligible for benefit of Faster Track Promotion.

Keeping in view the latest decisions on the subject, the benefit of faster track promotion is, therefore, admissible in respect of the following:-

1) The staff in position as on 1.2.1981 who had acquired the qualifications prescribed for the entry level for the next higher group of grades up to 31.12.1981;

2) The staff appointed to the various scientific/technical posts possessing the entry level qualifications prescribed for next higher group of grades up to 31.12.1981, and

3) The staff who had been selected by the Selection Committee up to 31.12.1981 but could not join their appointments by the above stipulated date for want of completion of essential formalities regarding verification of character and antecedents and examination by the competent medical authority.

Attention is also invited to the provision contained in para 4.11.1 of the Brochure circulated vide CSIR letter dated 2.11.1981 which, inter alia, provide that the Scientist A/AI who did not possess the minimum prescribed qualifications shall be entitled for assessment to the grade of Rs. 700-1300 in Group-III grades and that for further avenues of promotion they should obtain academic qualifications prescribed for promotion to the appropriate level of Group-IV grades. With reference t the provision of this para it is hereby clarified that only those Scientists A/AI in position as on 1.2.1981 who acquired the prescribed qualification of M.Sc/B.E. up to 31.12.1981 will only be eligible for assessment promotion to Group-IV grades and that this provision will not be applicable to those who obtain higher qualifications subsequent to this date.

The receipt of this letter may kindly be acknowledged."

5. Thus, from the above it is clear that the benefit of the 'faster track promotion' was inter alia admissible to staff in position as on February 1, 1981 who had acquired the qualification prescribed for the entry level for the next higher group of grades up to December 31, 1981.

6. Ms. Indu Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the petitioners were absolutely right in not giving the benefit of the 'faster track assessment scheme' to the respondents since the benefit of the scheme was available only to the employees of CSIR and that too up to the year 1981. She further contended that the respondents were not the employees of CSIR in the year 1981 and as such they were not "the staff in position" of the CSIR as on February 1, 1981. According to her, the respondents were employed in RUCS Project in 1979 and remained working in the project till March 31, 1984. It was also pointed out that the respondents were appointed against supernumerary posts in CRRI w.e.f. April 1, 1984 and as such they can be considered employees of CRRI only from that date and not earlier than that. As a sequitur it was urged that the respondents were not entitled to 'faster track promotions' since they were neither the employees of the CRRI or CSIR on February 1, 1981. We have considered the submission of the learned counsel. We, however, regret our inability to accept the same. It is clear from the office orders dated January 1, 1979 and June 19, 1979 that the respondents were appointed as Field Assistant by the CRRI for its RUCS Project. In this connection it will be beneficial to quote para 2 of the office order dated January 1, 1979 of the CRRI relating to the appointment of the first respondent. Para 2 reads as follows:-

"2. His/her appointment is under the Central Road Research Institute which is a Registered Society, registered under the Societies Registration Act and an Autonomous Body under the Ministry of Shipping and Transport."

To the same effect is para 4 of office order dated June 19, 1979 of the CRRI appointing the second respondent to the post of Field Officer. This para reads as under:-

"4. His/her appointment is under the Central Road Research Institute which is a Registered Society, registered under the Societies Registration Act and an Automonous Body under the Ministry of Shipping and Transport."

7. The aforesaid appointments of the respondents were made on the recommendations of selection committee. The office orders appointing the respondents were issued by the Administrative Officer, CRRI, with the approval of the Director, CRRI. The letters appointing the respondents categorically stated that they are to be governed by rules and orders issued by the CRRI from time to time. While working for the RUC Project the respondents were also given promotion on the recommendation of the selection committee with the approval of the Director, CRRI. Even on promotion they were to be governed by the terms and conditions applicable to other employees of the CRRI. In this regard, to illustrate the point, we may quote the relevant part of the letter of the CRRI dated October 29, 1990 by which the first respondent was promoted to the grade of Rs. 380-640:-

".....He will also be governed by such other terms and conditions of service as are applicable to other employees of the CRRI Society issued from time to time."

This office order again was issued by the Administrative Officer, CRRI. Subsequently, w.e.f. March 31, 1984, when the Project was wound up, the respondents, on the recommendation of the special committee with the approval of the CSIR, were appointed as Technicians Grade II by the CRRI. The order appointing the respondents as Technicians Grade II provided for counting the past services rendered by them in the RUCS Project for the purpose of their assessment. It also needs to be pointed out that subsequently fourteen shadow posts were created by the CSIR against which the respondents were adjusted in Grade VII. This is clear from the letter of the Joint Secretary (Admn.), CSIR, dated June 2, 1987 addressed to the Director, CRRI. The letter reads as under:-

"Sub: Absorption of temporary scheme staff of RUCS/Bombay Project in CRRI.

Sir,

With reference to your O.M. No. 1(350)/84-PL (Pt.II) dt. 14th May, 1987 on the above subject, I am directed to state that the CSIR has been pleased to accord approval to the creation of 14 shadow posts for persons recruited for the RUCS/Bombay Projects in CRRI as detailed below:-

Name of the post & scale of pay No. of shadow posts created For whom required

XX XX XX

d) Sr.Laboratory Asstt. Gr.VII Rs.380-640 (pre-revised) Rs.1350-2200 (revised) 5 posts

-----

-----

5. Shri Chander Bhan RUCS

XX XX XX

The above posts have been created w.e.f. 1.4.1984 and that will stand abolished as soon as the regular posts become available."

The fact that the posts were created by the CSIR is also clear from the office order dated July 14, 1987 pertaining to the appointment of the first respondent against the post of Technician Grade VII w.e.f. April 1, 1984 on regular establishment of CRRI. The relevant part of the letter needs to be quoted below:-

"He has been appointed against the shadow post of S.L.A. Gr. VII created vide CSIR letter No. 14(6)11/82-E.II (U.2) dt. 2.6.1987."

By another communication dated July 18, 1988 of the Joint Secretary (Admn.), CSIR, to the Director, CRRI, it was clarified that the previous service rendered by the employees of the institute prior to April 1, 1984 were also to count for assessment purposes in the case of employees who had opted for Option No. 2 except the period which they had served in the shadow post.

8. Thus, we are of the opinion that right from the date of appointment of the respondents in the year 1979 they were employed by the CRRI and continue to remain latter's employees even thereafter through February 1, 1981 and onwards. Service conditions applicable to employees of the CSIR are applicable to the employees of the CRRI, being a unit of the CSIR and NRAS was also applicable to the employees of the CRRI. The Tribunal therefore was right in stating and concluding that: (1) the respondents had been working continuously and without break from 1980, (2) the respondents were adjusted against the shadow posts in the CRRI and thereafter against supernumerary posts from March 1984, (3) since 1980 the respondents have been with the same organisation and on absorption they have been given the benefit of their previous service, (4) the petitioners were wrong in denying the benefit to the respondents on the ground that they were not regular employees of CRRI as on December 31, 1981, (5) the reason of the petitioners for not giving to the respondents the benefit of the 'faster track promotion', namely, that the appointments held by them during the years 1979 and 1980 were not against the regular posts, was not correct.

9. As already pointed out, the respondents were the employees of the CRRI even in the year 1979 and they remain and continue to be its employees even since. The office orders appointing the respondents as Field Assistants specifically stated that the terms and conditions as applicable to other employees of the CRRI shall apply to the respondents. It is not denied by Ms. Malhotra that the terms and conditions applicable to the employees of the CSIR are also applicable to the employees of the CRRI being a research institution under the CSIR. Therefore, the NRAS of 1981 was admittedly applicable to the respondents.

10. The only ground on which the respondents have been denied the benefit of para 0.4.9 of the NRAS of 1981 relating to 'faster track promotion scheme' by the petitioners was that the respondents were not regular employees of the CRRI as on February 1, 1981. The reason does not appeal to us. According to the letter of the CSIR dated November 16, 1984 addressed to the Heads of all National Laboratories/Institution, the faster track promotion scheme was admissible to "the staff in position as on 1.2.1981 who had acquired the qualifications prescribed for the entry level for the next higher group of grades up to 31.12.1981". The expression "the staff in position" does not mean the staff employed on the regular basis by the CRRI. The condition also applies to any member of the staff in position as on February 1, 1981. Admittedly, the respondents were members and the staff of the CRRI as on February 1, 1981 and were working in the RUCS Project of the CRRI. It is also not denied that even at the time of initial appointment in the year 1979 the respondents were possessed of the requisite qualifications since each one of them was having a Masters Degree to his credit. Thus, we do not find any merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners. In the circumstances, therefore, we approve the view of the Tribunal in rejecting the reasoning of the petitioners in denying the benefit of the faster track promotion scheme to the respondents.

11. In view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that the Tribunal was entirely right in directing the petitioners to consider the case of the respondents for faster track assessment for promotion. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.