RAM MURTI SHARMA Vs. DELHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY UNDERTAKING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition raises the question of counting the ad hoc service of the petitioners from the date of such appointments for purposes of determining the seniority. The other questions of law, which have also been raised, relate to the interpretation of Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (D.M.C.) (Seniority) Regulations, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as "1968 Regulations"), with regard to quota for promotees and direct 'recruits in the service and the operation of rotational rule. These questions have already been dealt with vide my separate judgment in Civil Writ Petition No. 3153/92 entitled Shri P. K. Thappar and others v. Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking and othters, (1) and it will not be necessary for me to re-state the same hi the present judgment. The main contention in that writ petition was that sinve the quota had collapsed and broken down, seniority could not be determined on the basis of quota and rota and the same became liable to be determined on the basis of continuous length of service.

(2.) The petitioners were initially anointed as Inspectors/Operators. Petitioners I to 4 were appointed as Inspectors and petitioner No. 5, was appointed as Operator. Later on, the petitioneps 1 to 4 were promoted as Superintendents (Technical) and petitioner No. 5 was promoted as Assistant Controller and thereafter as Controller. The posts of Superintendent (Technical) and Controller are feeder posts for promotion to the higher post of Assistant Engineer (E/M). The petitioners were firstly promoted as Assistant Engineers on ad hoc basis on different dates and it is contended by them that the said promotions had in fact all the ingredients of regular promotion, in as much as the promotions were made against the regular vacancies falling in promotion quota and through a duly constituted Departmental Promotion Committee (for short D. P. C.) in respect of petitioners I to 4 wherein all the eligible candidates were considered and in the case of petitioner No. 5. the promotion was also made on ad hoc basis in 1981 and was extended from time to time. The promotion was made against regular vacancies falling in promotion quota and through a regularly constituted D. P. C. although petitioner No. 5 was adjusted subsequently in the quota of Controllers in a regular vacancy. The ad hoc promotions of the petitioners took place initially for a period of six months or till further orders and the relative details may be reproduced as follows : Sl. Name Date of order Date of - No. appointment as Adhoc Asstt. Engr. 1. Ram Murti Sharma, Petitioner No. 1 28-6-1982 30-6-1982 2. Lal Chand Wadhwa. Petitioner No. 2 17-8-1983 22-8-1983 3. Subhash Chander, Petitioner no. 3 -do- 22-8-1983 4. H.C. Verma, Petitioner no. 4 -do- 22-8-1983 5. S.K. Jain, Petitioner no. 5 12-3-1981 17-3-1981

(3.) The services of the petitioners were regularised on the recommendations of the D. P. C. in the meeting held on 2/3rd June, 1987. The said meeting of the Committee was presided over by a member of the Union Public Service Commission. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that although the petitioners were promoted on ad hoc basis, the promotions had all the characteristics of regular selection as they were duly selected by a properly constituted D. P. C. and in accordance with statutory Regulations. The appointments were made within their quota and against regular vacancies and the period of ad hoc service was continuous and uninterrupted. They are, accordingly, entitled to be regularised from the dates of their appointment, as indicated above. He has further argued that it was not necessary to consult U. P. S. C. or to seek its approval at the time, when initial selection on ad hoc basis was made. The petitioners are governed by the provisions of Recruitment Regulations for the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical and Mechanical), 1980. The relevant provisions may be reproduced as under : "1. Name of Post Assistant Engineer (Electrical & Mechanical) 2. No. of posts 261 3. Classification Class-11 4. Scale of Pay Rg. 650-30-740-35-810-EB-880-40- 1000-EB-40-1200. 5. Whether selection post or non- Selection selection post. 7. Whether benefit of added years of No service admissible under rule 30 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. 8. Educational and other qualifications Essential : required for direct recruits (i) Degree in Electrical and Mechanical Engineering from a recognised University or equivalent. (ii) I year's professional experience preferably in a large Electric Supply Undertaking. Note I: Qualification are relaxable at the discretion of the Appointing Authority in case of candidate otherwise well qualified. Note H........ 10. Method of rectt. whether by direct 50 % by promotion failing which rectt. or by promotion or by dopu- by direct recruitment and 50 % by tation/transfer &. percentage of the direct recruitment. vacancies to be filled by various methods. 11. In case of rectt. by promotion Promotion ; doputation/transfer, grades from (1 ) 75 % of the promotion quota: which promotion/deputation/transfor (i) Superintendent (Tech) with 3 to be made. years regular service in the grade in the case of degree holder and 7 years regular service in the case of Diploma Holders. (ii) Failing (i) above. Superintendent (Tech) with 5 years regular service in. the grades of Superintendent (Technical) and Inspector combined together in the case of Degree Holders and 10 years regular service in the case of Diploma Holders. (Hi) Failing (i) and (ii) above, Inspector with 5 years regular service in the case of Degree holder and 10 years regular service in the grade in the case of Diploma holders. (Note) The service in the grade of Superintendent (Selection Grade) shall count towards qualifying service in the grade of Superintendent (Tech) for promotion. (b) 13 /o of the promotion quota : (i) Controllers with 3 years regular service in the grade in the case of Degree holders and 7 years regular service in the grade in the case of Diploma holders. (ii) Failing (i) above. Controller with 5 years regular service in the grade of Controller and Assistant Contiuller combined together in the case of Degree holders and 10 years regular service in the case of Diploma holders. (iii) Failing (i) and (ii) above. Assistant Controller with 5 years regular service in the grade in the case of Degree holders and 10 years regular service in die grade in the case of diploma holders. Note : The service in the grade of Controller (Selection Grade) shall count towards qualifying service in the grade of Controller for promotion. (c)..........".