T GHALAMAIAH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of writ petitions raises a common question viz., whether it is open to the Government to exclude a particular class of supervisors who passed only the Government Technical Examination from being promoted to the next higher post of Assistant Engineers. For the purpose of disposal of these writ petitions, it would suffice if the facts appearing in W.P. No. 5221 of 1971 are stated. This petition is filed by three supervisors who qualified themselves for appointment as Overseers by passing the Government Technical Examination held by the Madras Government. The 1st petitioner was appointed as Rural Wells Sub-Overseer in the Minor Irrigation Department in the district of Nellore on 29th May, 1946. He was later promoted as Minor Irrigation Overseer in March 1950. During that period he appeared for the Lower Grade of the Government Technical Examinations and passed that examination. The subjects prescribed for that examination were: (1) Building Drawing and Estimating ; (2) Surveying and Levelling ; (3) Building Materials and Constructions; (4) Hydraulics and Imigation; (5) Earthwork and Road making; (6) Mensuration (Lower) ; and (7) Applied Mechanics. His services were regularised with effect from 20th April, 1951 and he completed his probation as Overseer on 19th April, 1953. He was promoted as Supervisor in the Minor Irrigation Department on 16th December, 1961 and has been confirmed in that post with effect from 18th January, 1964. He has put in a continuous service of 25 years in the Department. The 2nd petitioner too was appointed as Minor Irrigation Overseer in Anantapur District in July 1949. During the year 1951-52 he passed the seven tests referred to above and his services were regularised in the cadre of Minor Irrigation Overseer and Was also promoted as Supervisor on 12th March, 1964. His probation as Supervisor was also declared on 17th November, 1968. The 3rd petitioner was appointed as a Tracer in the Superintending Engineer's Office at Anantapur in August, 1945 in which capacity he worked till 21st June, 1948. Thereafter he was appointed as a Draftsman and he continued to work as Draftsman till 17th March, 1952. Then he was appointed as a Minor Irrigation Overseer and in that capacity he worked till 27th November, 1953. He had passed the Government Technical Examination like the other two petitioners and he was therefore appointed as Minor Irrigation Overseer in December 1954. He was promoted as Engineering Supervisor in 1965 and he has completed his probation having also passed the Account Test in 1970. He has put in about 26 years of service. All the three petitioners are Supervisors in the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj Engineering Subordinate Service.

(2.) Except the petitioners who had passed the Government Technical Examination all other categories of Supervisors whether they possess Upper Subordinate or L.G.E. Diploma or an equivalent qualification with 10 years of service or Lower Subordinate with 20 years of service as the case may be are made eligible for promotion as Assistant Engineers. It is therefore the grievance of the petitioners in all the writ petitions that there is no rationale or reason behind their exclusion from being made eligible for promotion to the Assistant Engineers cadre and therefore the impugned rule 4 (4) (b] (ii) which affects their right to promotion is violative of the rights guaranteed to them under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

(3.) In the counter-affidavit filed by the Deputy Chief Engineer (Panchayat Raj) on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that persons who pass the technical subjects like the petitioners will not be taught the designs and implications of structural safety ; and with the lower qualifications they possess, they will not be in a position to attend to major constructional works of bridges and buildings which include designs of major structural components. It is their case that the duties and functions of an Assistant Engineer are such that one should be better qualified technically and therefore considering the technical knowledge that an Assistant Engineer should possessin the discharge of his functions, qualifications have been prescribed for promotion and the petitioners therefore cannot complain of any discrimination when they lack the minimum technical qualifications. It is also maintained by them that if the Supervisors who possess an L.C.E. diploma or Upper Subordinate diploma are made eligible to the next higher post, it is because they have passed certain subjects which gave them higher technical qualification than those who passed only the Government Technical Examination, and therefore if they are made eligible and those who pass the Government Technical Examination are not made eligible, the discrimination is made on intelligible basis having nexus to the object sought to be achieved viz., efficiency and competency in the construction of major works and projects which require special knowledge and skill. It is also further stated that even the diploma holders cannot be promoted under the Rules to posts higher than that of an Executive Engineer and the rules have been so framed having regard to the special knowledge that a person holding the post of an Assistant Engineer or an Executive Engineer should possess.