KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD BANGALORE Vs. G R LAKSHMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KARNATAKA electricity board is constituted under Section 12 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 ("the act" ). Section 79 of the act confers powers on the board to make regulations to prescribe for the duties of the officers and other employees of the board and their salaries, allowances and other conditions of service. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 79 (c) of the Act, the board has framed the recruitment and promotions regulations. Chapter-v of the regulations sets out the category of post and nature of recruitment as well as minimum qualification. One of the posts categorised is of junior engineers and the nature of recruitment is 60% of the posts by direct recruitment, while 35% by promotions from the lower cadre of operators/meter readers/overseers on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. The minimum qualification required for direct recruits is a diploma in electrical or mechanical engineering of a polytechnic of the State of Karnataka or the equivalent qualification. In respect of candidates to be promoted from the lower cadre, the minimum qualification in case of candidates, who are having i. t. i. certificate, is minimum experience of 5 years as operators/meter readers/overseers. In case of candidates, who are non-s. s. l. c. , and s. s. l. c. , they should have put in not less than 15 years of service. The posts of operators/meter readers/overseers are filled in both by direct recruitment and promotion. The cadre lower than that of operator/meter reader/overseer is wireman and mechanic grade- ii/shift mechanics. The minimum qualification for being directly recruited to the post of operators/overseers is holding of i. t. i. certificate of 18/24 months course in electrician or telecommunication and/or electronics from the government industrial training institute or certificate in lineman trade issued by the Karnataka electricity board.

(2.) IN exercise of the powers conferred under Section 79 (c) of the Act, the board issued a notification dated February 3, 1982, amending the Karnataka electricity board recruitment and promotions of employees of the board service regulations in respect of the cadre of junior engineers. The amendment provided as follows:

(3.) SEVERAL writ petitions under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution were filed by the technically qualified operators in the year 1990 onwards before the learned single judge to challenge the amendment of the Rule providing for quota of 1:1 for promotion from the cadre of operators/meter readers/overseers to the cadre of junior engineers. The gravamen of the complaint in the petitions was that on appointment to the post of operators/meter readers/overseers either by direct recruitment or by promotion from the lower cadres, an integrated cadre came into existence and it is not permissible for the board to provide quota or ratio for promotion of different categories of employees on the basis of educational qualifications. The direct recruits claimed that the promotions to the cadre of junior engineers should be strictly on the basis of seniority-cum-merit and reservation of quota for non-technical operators has caused serious prejudice to the chances of direct recruits for further promotion. The direct recruits further pleaded that the merit reflected by the qualifications acquired was denied its due weightage by prescribing quota of 1:1 between the direct recruits and the promotees and thereby the efficiency of the services is seriously hampered. It was also contended that the amendment of the regulation is in breach of the Provisions of Section 79 of the act. The relief sought was to quash the amended regulation providing for fixation of quota of 1:1 between the technically qualified operators and non-technical operators for consideration of promotion to the higher cadre of junior engineers. The petitions were resisted by the board and the promotee-operators on the ground that the challenge to the amended regulation was raised after several years and consideration of the challenge would lead to disturbance of the promotions already effected. It was claimed that the relief sought in the writ petitions should be denied on the ground of laches. On merits, it was claimed that the regulation was amended and quota or ratio of 1:1 was settled by taking into consideration the administrative efficiency needed to run the services. The board claimed that it is not merely the qualification, but the experience, which counts in smooth functioning of the activities of the board and it was incumbent to strike a balance between the qualifications on one hand and experience on the other. The contention of the direct recruits that the fixation of quota for promotion violated the rights guaranteed under articles 14 and 16 of the constitution, was denied.