SH. KAMARUDDIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this Writ Petition, the challenge is made to the Order dated January 27, 2012 passed in O.A No.3836/2010 and to the order dated March 14, 2012 passed in R.A No.73/2012 in O.A No.3836/2010, whereby the O.A and the R.A filed by the petitioner have been dismissed.

(2.) THE brief facts are that the petitioner is working as Carpenter in CPWD w.e.f. July 25, 1989. The next promotion post is Works Assistant. The promotion is regulated in terms of the rules known as Central Public Work Development (supporting officers), Works Assistants and Road Inspectors Recruitment Rules 1970, framed under the powers conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. A relevant amendment was made to the rules in the year 1978, which, inter-alia, stipulates that for promotion to the post of Works Assistant, a separate competitive departmental test (theoretical and practical) will also be held. The person for appointment to the post will be selected from amongst the carpenters, mason, blacksmith, plumbers and painters, on the basis of merit in the test. The petitioner appeared in the departmental test in the year 2002 and was placed at serial no.71 on the basis of 56 marks obtained by him. Another test was held in the year 2003. A combined list/ panel was prepared, of the successful candidates who had appeared in the departmental test of 2002 & 2003. The petitioner was placed at serial no.50 of that particular list. From time to time, the promotions to the post of Works Assistant were being made from the panel.

(3.) THE respondents in their reply had taken a stand that as per the recruitment rules for the post of Works Assistant, the sole criteria for promotion shall be merit prepared on the basis of departmental test. Therefore, according to the respondents, the petitioner could be promoted as and when his turn comes. Candidates who got 57 marks have been promoted till date. Since the petitioner had only 56 marks, he could not be promoted. In so far as the allegation that persons with lesser marks have been promoted, the stand of the respondents has been that upto the period of January 2008, the promotion was made on merit basis. Subsequently vide order dated February 18, 2008, it was decided to make the promotions in accordance with seniority position instead of merit. Persons above in seniority were promoted even though they have lesser marks. This position of rule existed till May 15, 2009, whereby O.M dated February 18, 2008 was withdrawn and the earlier system of promotion based on merit was restored. This explains as to why persons having lesser marks were promoted. It is also noted that the departmental tests are conducted annually. The name of the candidates from the list/ panel conducted annually is re-arranged in order of merit by the committee, which conducts the test.