A M PUTTASWAMAIAH Vs. SECRETARY KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners had joined the services of the respondent Karnataka state electricity board (in short 'the board'), in the cadre of storekeepers. they have filed the present writ petitions to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion to the post of assistant executive engineers on the ground that persons ranking junior to them in the amalgamated cadre of storekeepers and assistant engineers have already been promoted.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY, the board pursuant to a memorandum of settlement, had passed an order on 23-10-1993 amalgamating the various cadres. As per this Order, the cadre of storekeepers grade I was amalgamated with that of assistant engineers (electrical) thereby creating a common cadre. Subsequently, the board in exercise of its powers under section 79 (c) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, (in short 'the act'), by its notification dated 8-8-1995 (Annexure-C) amended the Karnataka electricity board recruitment and promotions of employees of the board service regulations, 1969. Prior to the said amendment as is evident from sl. No. 7 of chapter v of the regulations, 30% of the posts of assistant executive engineer (electrical) were to be filled up by promotions from the cadre of assistant engineers (electrical) (non-graduates) on the basis of seniority-cum-merit subject to fulfilling of the eligibility requirements including that of passing executive-higher examinations.

(3.) PURSUANT to the amendment, the storekeepers grade i also became eligible for promotion against the said 30% posts of assistant executive engineer (electrical ). But the eligibility criteria of the minimum qualifies tions for seeking such promotion remained the same. The amendment was published in the official gazette, only on 15-2-1996. Therefore the board under its notification dated 14-3-1996 (Annexure-B) clarified that the amended rules will become operative only from the date of publication, that is 15-2-1996. In view of the said amendment the employees like the petitioners being holders of the post of storekeepers also became entitled for consideration to the post of assistant executive engineers (electrical), but it was subject to fulfilling of minimum eligibility requirements. admittedly, neither of the two petitioners have passed the executive-higher examination. Therefore till they pass the said examination, despite their ranking in the common cadre seniority list, they could not have been considered for promotion to the higher post. It is well settled that if the basis for according promotion to the higher grade is seniority-cum-merit and if on a given date the seniors are not found to be eligible to the promotional post then the persons ranking junior but otherwise eligible can be accorded promotion without there being any danger of defeating the rights of the seniors. In the above view of the matter, the grievance of the petitioners are without any merit and does not deserve any favourable consideration by this court.