DARSHAN SINGH; AJAY KUMAR; GURDIAL Vs. BHAKRA BEAS MANAGEMENT BOARD; BHAKRA BEAS MANAGEMENT BOARD; BHAKRA BEAS MANAGEMENT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of Civil Writ petition No. 12204 of 2007, wherein the petitioners having obtained National Apprenticeship Certificate in the trade of lineman from the respondent-Bhakra Beas Management Board (for short 'the BBMB'), sought appointment as lineman, pursuant to advertisement dated 27.10.2006 as amended on 15.4.2007, as also Civil Writ petition No. 1343 of 2008 and Civil Writ Petition No. 2015 of 2008, wherein challenge is laid to the the condition of dispensing with the written examination for the holders of National Apprenticeship Certificate from the BBMB.

(2.) The respondent-BBMB on 27.10.2006 invited applications to fill upon 29 posts of lineman by way of direct recruitment. However, by virtue of the subsequent corrigendum (Annexure P.4), the number of posts of lineman were revised to 47. The prescribed qualification and experience were matric or its equivalent in the trade of lineman. The petitioners in Civil Writ Petition No. 12204 of 2007 filed a Writ Petition before this Court claiming benefit of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in U. P. Road Transport Corporation v. U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishukhs Bereozgar Sangh & Ors., AIR 1995 Supreme Court 1115, pointing out that Punjab State Electricity Board has been considering the apprentice trainees of the Punjab State Electricity Board for appointment without holding of the written examination for its apprentice trainees. It is contemplated that the holding of the written examination for the petitioners is illegal. After the said petition was filed, the BBMB has taken a decision that the candidates, who had got apprenticeship training from the BBMB are not to be subjected to written test. The said decision became subject matter of challenge in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 1343 and 2015 of 2008.

(3.) In reply to the writ petition, the BBMB has relied upon Regulation 4 of the BBMB Class III & IV Employees (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1994. It was pleaded that the Staff Selection Committee is to advertise the vacancies and notify the vacancies to the Employment Exchange and hold test and conduct interviews as per the procedure approved by the Chairman from time to time. In view of the said regulation, the BBMB vide its communication dated 3.7.1998 notified the procedure regarding recruitment of Class-III and Class-IV posts by the Centralised Staff Selection Committee of BBMB. Para 2(e) of the aforesaid letter stipulates that in case the number of applications received against advertisement is large, the Centralized Staff Selection Committee shall hold test or conduct interviews for the shortlisting of the candidates. Subsequently vide letter dated 7.2.2000, the Chairman of the BBMB decided that if the Centralised Staff Selection Committee decides to hold the test for the purposes of shortlisting the candidates, then all the eligible candidates should be called for the test. Thereafter, the merit list of the candidates, who passed the test be prepared and three candidates against one post be called for interview qua their merit, keeping in view the reserved posts for various categories. In view of the instructions issued, the Centralised Staff Selection Committee fixed the criteria. The criteria was that screened out candidates are required to be called for trade test and interview in the ratio of 1:3. All the 30 BBMB trained eligible candidates and 48 candidates screened on the basis of merit of such screening test were to be called for trade test and interview. Similarly for 10 posts meant for Scheduled Castes category, 14 BBMB trained apprentices and 16 candidates on the basis of merit in the screening test were to be called for trade test and interview. Similar ratio was fixed in respect of other categories. 50 marks were assigned for the trade test and interview. 25 marks were earmarked for trade test to check proficiency of the candidates in the lineman trade, whereas 10% weightage i.e. 5 marks were earmarked to the candidates, who had taken two years apprenticeship training from BBMB. Minimum two marks for two apprenticeship training in BBMB were assigned to be given to the apprentices, who had done apprenticeship after 1.1.2004, but for the trainees who had completed training before 2004, extra-weigtage of 0.25 marks per year were to be given to them. Five marks were allotted for experience of lineman excluding the period of apprenticeship training (i.e. one mark for each year experience limiting to 5 marks for 5 years or more experience). 5 marks were assigned for higher qualification like Diploma/Degree/AMIE in the Electrical Engineering, whereas 10 marks were assigned for personal interview. It is also pointed out that the candidates, who have done apprenticeship training from BBMB were not subjected to screening test. All candidates including the candidates, who have done their apprenticeship from BBMB were subjected to trade test and interview and graded as per the criteria fixed. On the basis of the criteria fixed, certain candidates, who have completed apprenticeship training from BBMB, could not make it to final selection and thus, it is contended that the procedure adopted by the BBMB is in tune with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in U.P. Road Transport Corporation's case (supra).