PRABODH KUMAR Vs. HINDUSTAN CABLES LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is seeking a writ of certaorari to quash the order in RC.CMD.12/84 dated February 10, 1984. The facts in support of this writ petition are stated thus: While the petitioner was working as a Commercial Manager in the special pay scale of Rs. 1,500 to Rs.1800/- under the respondent, an advertisement was made in February. 1982 calling for applications for appointment as a Commercial Manager, carrying a pay scale of Rs.1800/- to Rs.2250/-, in 30 Lac Unit of the respondent. (It may be made clear that the Government of India set up a Unit with 30 Lac Project for which the recruitment to various posts was sought to be made, and one of which is a Commercial Manager). The qualifications prescribed are graduation, fifteen years service and five years service of a comparable position in an organisation of reputation. The candidate must also have working experience in all aspects of material management. A proviso was also incorporated thereunder stating that a candidate having lesser experience may be offered the next lower scale of pay. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner applied himself by furnishing all his qualifications and experience. Thereafter, he was interviewed on February 21, 1983 by a Committee consisting of Sri K.L.Reddi, Chairman and Managing Director, Sri K.Subramanyam, One of the Directors, and one Sri S.Roy, the General Manager of the respondent organisation. He was found suitable. He was selected, and an order of appointment was given on the same day. Pursuant thereto, he joined duty in the afternoon of the same day. He was put on probation for one year; While he was working, he received a communication on July 16, 1983 setting aside his appointment. The grounds furnished in the same order disclose that the committee which selected the petitioner was not furnished with all the material information relating to the candidates to be interviewed vitiating the order of appointment. The petitioner challenged the said order in Writ Petition No.6354/83, and this court, by an order dated August 16, 1983, stayed the operation of the said order, and as a result, the petitioner continued to be as a Commercial Manager in the pay scale of Rs. 1800/- to Rs.2250/-. The said writ petition has come up for final hearing on November 22, 1983, and it was slowed since the order is violative of the principles of natural justice. But however, an option was given to the. respondent to take appropriate action after/1 giving an opportunity.

(2.) Subsequently, by a show cause notice dated January 4, 1984, the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why him appointment as a Commercial Manager in the pay scale of Rs. 1,800/- to Rs.2,250/- should not be cancelled. The grounds mentioned in support thereof are that the Committee was not properly constituted in terms of the resolution No.5 dated August 31, 1973. It is stated that the Hindustan Cables Officers' Association complained against the appointment of the petitioner. Then the Chairman and the Managing Director ordered the Chief Personnel and Administrative Manager to enquire into, and to report, who by report dated May 24, 1983, recommended for the reasons stated therein, to review the selection of the petitioner. It is noticed that the screening of the applications for the post was defective inasmuch as the Selection Committee was not furnished with full particulars of the candidates. Senior Officers who applied for the post and who ought to have been called for Interview, were omitted. A subcommittee was appointed on June 4, 1983 which went into the question. They were satisfied that the appointment of the petitioner is vitiated. The Sub-Committee recommended to set aside the selection and appointment as per the report dated July 9, 1983, in order to hold a fresh selection. Therefore, the petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation. The petitioner initially gave his explanation on January 17, 1984 and requested to furnish certain details (the material is not important to reproduce at this stage). He reiterated his request by a letter dated January 24, 1984. However, they were not supplied. As a result, the petitioner submitted his final explanation on February 4, 1984, and thereafter, the respondent passed the impugned order on February 10, 1984 setting aside the order of appointment, and posting the petitioner to the scale of pay of Rs.1,375/- to Rs. 1,800/- as a Commercial Manager. This Order is now the subject of this Writ Petition.

(3.) Sri R.Venugopal Reddy, the learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the order of respondent is vitiated for more than one reason. He firstly contended that this order is in the nature of a review of the order of appointment made by the committee headed by Sri K.L.Reddi, the then Chairman and Managing Director. The respondent has no power or jurisdiction to review the same order. The Articles of Association of the Company does not authorise such a review. The appointment order was passed by the' Board and Chairman and Managing Director has no competence to pass the order. He further contended that the grounds on which the order was passed are the illegal constitution of the Committee for selection, and non furnishing of the information to the Selection Committee. The first ground was not the ground on which the order was passed at the first instance which was challenged in the earlier Writ Petition , No.6354/83, and therefore, they cannot substitute another ground as a justification for the conclusion they reached at. With regard to the second ground, it is contended that one Sri S.Roy was the General Manager Sri K.L.Reddi, the Chairman and Managing Director directed him to scrutinised the applications received which were as many as 151, end found eighteen candidates elegible, and out of them, seven candidates were short listed consisting of four international' candidates and three external candidates. The seven candidates were interviewed by the Committee, and the petitioner alone was found to be suitable. The petitioner had enough experience in the organisation of the respondent itself though not for a period of five years. He was the youngest and has potential growth lead the organization in respect of commercial management on sound lines; he had experience of all material management for. nearly two years. Since he is the only candidate having meritorious record of service, the Committee obviously considered and found him to be suitable, and appointed him. The Committee had before it the bio-data of all the candidates furnished by Sri S.Roy. Therefore, the contention that all the information was not furnished, is only a ruse to set aside the order of appointment.