V BHAVANI Vs. V SISUPALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is the selection and appointment of Smt.V.Bhavani and Sri.S.Sreenivasan to the Indian Administrative Service out of the non State Civil Service officers legal and valid The Central Administrative Tribunal has found that the selection was not in accordance with law. Thus, it has accepted the petitions filed by Sri.V.Sisupalan and P.M.Senan. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the two selected officers and the State Government have filed these four petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. The sequence of events may be briefly noticed.

(2.) On August 1, 1997 the Chief Secretary issued a Circular pointing out that appointments had to be made by selection from amongst the non State Civil Service Officers to the Indian Administrative Service. Officers serving in connection with the affairs of the State, who had completed "not less than 8 years of continuous service under the State Government as on 1.4.1997 in a gazetted post involving duties comparable in importance and responsibility to that of the State Civil Service and also holding the post in a substantive capacity are eligible to be considered - Officers were requested to forward their recommendations from amongst the persons working under their administrative control. The details had to be given in the prescribed proforma. The officers were asked to forward the C.R. dossiers with up-to-date reports of the officers. This request was reiterated vide letter dated August 28, 1997. In pursuance to the aforesaid letter, different departmental Secretaries had forwarded the names of different persons. It appears that, in all, the names of 19 persons were received in the office of the Chief Secretary.

(3.) On June 1, 1998, Mukundan, Under Secretary, sent a communication to the Department of General Administration (C.R. Cell) pointing out that in respect of 11 officers the Confidential Reports "were missing .. for the period noted against each." Ultimately, the then Chief Secretary selected 10 persons, out of the 19 whose names had been received from different departments. A copy of the note dated August 13, 1998 recorded by the Chief Secretary is at page 27 of the original file shown to us by Mr.Roy Chacko, learned Sr.Government Pleader.