Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajay Kumar vs The Union Of India on 12 June, 2023
Author: Sheel Nagu
Bench: Sheel Nagu, Hirdesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
WP. No.5779 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. AJAY KUMAR S/O SUKHRAM, AGED
ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION : FITTER,
N.C.L, AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
2. NEERAJ KUMAR DUBEY S/O SHRI
MUDRIKA PRASAD DUBEY, AGED ABOUT
28 YEARS, OCCUPATION : DUMPER
OPERATOR, N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT-
SINGRAULI (M.P.)
3. SHIVRAM S/O SHRI KAILASH RAM, AGED
ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION : DUMPER
OPERATOR, N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT-
SINGRAULI (M.P.)
4. PRABHAKANT TIWARI S/O SHRI HIRA LAL
TIWARI, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : DUMPER OPERATOR,
N.C.L. AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
5. YOGESH KUMAR S/O SHRI VIJENDRA
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : DUMPER OPERATOR,
- 2 -
N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
6. KRISHNA KUMAR TIWARI S/O SHRI
PRAMOD KUMAR TIWARI, AGED ABOUT 30
YEARS, OCCUPATION : DUMPER
OPERATOR, N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT-
SINGRAULI (M.P.)
7. MOHAMMAD MANSOOR ALAM S/O
MOUBUDEEN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : DUMPER OPERATOR,
N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
8. ABHISHEK CHANSORIYA S/O SHRI
SURESH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : DUMPER OPERATOR,
N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
9. SHIVAM KUMAR SEN S/O SHRI GANESH
PRASAD SEN, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : DUMPER OPERATOR,
N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
10. HARIOM PATEL S/O SHRI KESHAV SINGH
PATEL, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : DUMPER OPERATOR,
N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
11. SACHIN S/O SHRI PAWAN KUMAR, AGED
ABOUT 28 YEARS , OCCUPATION :
GRADER OPERATOR, N.C.L., AMLORI,
DISTRICT- SINGRAULI (M.P.)
12. BALRAM VERMA S/O SHRI KISHORE
SINGH VERMA , AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : ELECTRICIAN, N.C.L.,
AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI (M.P.)
- 3 -
13. AJAY SINGH RAGHUWANSHI S/O SHRI
GULAB SINGH RAGHUWANSHI, AGED
ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION :
ELECTRICIAN , N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT-
SINGRAULI (M.P.)
14. RAVINDRA SINGH CHOURASIYA S/O SHRI
GANGARAM CHOURASIYA, AGED ABOUT
26 YEARS, OCCUPATION : DUMPER
OPERATOR, N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT-
SINGRAULI (M.P.)
15. YADLA VENKATA ASHOK S/O SHRI
SATYANARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
OCCUPATION : DUMPER OPERATOR,
N.C.L., AMLORI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI
(M.P.)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI S.M. SHUKLA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
COAL, NEW DELHI.
2. THE DIRECTOR [PERSONNEL],
NORTHERN COALFIELDS LTD.
SINGRAULI, DISTRICT- SINGRAULI (M.P.)
3. THE DY. GENERAL MANAGER
[PERSONNEL], MANPOWER &
RECRUITMENT DEPARTMENT OF N.C.L.,
DISTRICT- SINGRAULI (M.P.)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI GREESHM JAIN - ADVOCATE FOR
CAVEAT & SMT AMRIT KAUR RUPRAH -
ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1)
- 4 -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserved on : 02.05.2023
Pronounced on : 12.06.2023
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition having been heard and reserved for orders,
coming on for pronouncement this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Sheel
Nagu pronounced the following:
ORDER
This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, by 15 petitioners working as Dumper Operator under respondent No.2 & 3, prays for the following reliefs:-
"(I) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and set aside para no.B(b) and B(e) notification dated 22/02/2023 and declared ultra virus, in the interest of justice. (II) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly call entire record. (III) That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deemed fit and proper looking into the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. The challenge is to conditions contained in Note (b) and (e) circumscribing the minimum qualification prescribed for filling up the post of Clerk(Tr.) Gr.-III notified vide advertisement dated 22.02.2023 vide Annexure P/1. The said two impugned conditions are reproduced below:
"b) The employees in a grade or category with initial basic of equal or more than Rs.28242.84 per month or Rs.1086.26 per day shall not be considered eligible. (As per NCWA-X)
- 5 -
e) The employees working in the critical designations say, Paramediacal Staff, HEMM Operators and Electrical Supervisors for which the NCL had resorted to avail the services of Ex-
employees as per the CIL guidelines for availing the services of superannuated Non-Executive cadre Employees who worked in Statutory/Essential/Critical Nature of Job, shall not be considered eligible to apply."
3. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard on the question of admission so also final disposal.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner primarily submits that despite fulfilling the minimum educational qualification for the post of Clerk (Tr.) Grade-III, the right of petitioners to be considered for appointment to the said post is denied by the aforesaid impugned conditions. It is submitted that impugned Note (b) restricts the eligibility to only those employees who are paid basic salary of Rs.28,242.84 per month or Rs.1,086.26 per day or lower as per Northern Coalfields Wage Agreement-X (NCWA-X). Since petitioners are earning the grade of Rs.1,154/- per day which is more than Rs.1,086.26 per day, they are rendered ineligible for being considered for appointed as Clerk (Tr.) Gr. III despite being otherwise eligible under the Recruitment Rules. Similarly, Note (e) as aforesaid prohibits Dumper Operators from applying for the said post.
4.1 Learned counsel for petitioners has referred to the cadre scheme for ministerial staff vide Annexure R/1 to Return filed by respondent No.2 & 3, which prescribes the following minimum qualification (educational/ technical) :-
CADRE SCHEME FOR MINISTERIAL STAFF GENERAL CLERICAL CADRE (Circulated Vide 1.1 No.34, dated 17.07.1984)
- 6 -
S.No. Scale of Scale of Minimum Eligibility for Mode of
Pay/Category Pay/Category qualification Promotion Promoti
(Rs.) (Rs.) Education/Technical on
1. Clerk Gr. III Clerical Gr.-III i) Matriculation or 3 years service in Selection 625-23-947/- equivalent Company /Test examination from any recognized Board of Examination 4.2 On the strength of aforesaid minimum qualification laid down for entry into the cadre of Clerk Grade-III, it is submitted that petitioners despite fulfilling the requisite qualification of matriculation pass with three years experience in the company, are being denied their right to be even considered for the said post due to impugned conditions under Note (b) and (e). 4.3 Lastly, it is submitted by petitioners that their right to be considered for public employment being a fundamental right under Article 16 of the Constitution which cannot be curtailed by an executive instruction Annexure P/1.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent-employer filed a return inter alia revealing that the post of Dumper Operator on which petitioners were initially appointed and are working till date, is a post attached to the core and critical functions of production and ancillary task in the Company. It is thus submitted that if Dumper Operators are permitted to become Clerk Grade-III then the technical staff of the like of petitioners which is already scarce shall further be reduced to an extent of adversely affecting productivity. It is further urged that Dumper Operators have been provided with different channel of promotion and if they are permitted to change the nature of employment from technical to non-technical then the promotional prospects of general Mazdoor who are in class IV category, would be adversely affected.
- 7 -
6. After due consideration of the rival contentions, the question that falls for consideration is as to whether the employer in public interest can prescribe such conditions/restrictions which abridge the eligibility criteria prescribed in Recruitment Rules to the extent of restricting the chances of appointment/promotion in public interest.
6.1 The eligibility criteria of matriculation with 3 years service prescribed in the Rules as reproduced above, is the minimum that is required by any candidate to be eligible for being considered and appointed as Clerk (Tr.) Grade-III. Thus, the Recruitment Rules by stipulating such criteria to be minimum, prohibit any lowering of the standard than the one prescribed by Recruitment Rules.
However, the Recruitment Rules do not prohibit any additional or more stringent eligibility criteria to be prescribed over and above the minimum eligibility criteria, provided such prescription satisfies the test under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
6.2 Thus what needs to be decided is whether this additional or more stringent eligibility criteria passes the test of reasonableness or not ? 6.3 It is not disputed at the bar that Dumper Operators (petitioners) have other promotional avenues within the technical cadre which can very well be availed to satisfy the urge of career progression. Thus, it cannot be said that by prescribing more stringent condition than the one prescribed by Recruitment Rules, petitioners' right to be considered for promotion/appointment has been denied. The petitioners are substantive members of the technical staff involved in the core and related activities qua production and; therefore, in normal course, the legality and validity of their right to be considered for promotion/appointment is to be judged by the available avenues within the technical cadre. To this extent, the fundamental right of petitioners to be considered for higher career progression within the technical cadre is preserved.
- 8 -
It is only in the non-technical cadre including Clerk (Tr.) Gr.III that the right to be considered for promotion/appointment has been restricted in public interest of scarcity of technical staff in the Company. Such restrictions cannot take the shape of denial of right to be considered specially when the avenue of career progression is available within the technical cadre for Dumper Operators. In the given facts and circumstances, it appears that grievance of petitioners Dumper Operators is restrictions/curtailment in the chances of promotion and not in the right to be considered for promotion. The chances of promotion cannot be claimed as of right and; therefore, the claim does not appear to be tenable. Thus, by no stretch of imagination such restriction can fall within denial of equal opportunity to the petitioners in matters of public employment.
7. In view of above and the reasons assigned by employer of scarcity in the technical cadre of Dumper Operator, the need to provide promotional avenues to Mazdoor and a Dumper Operator being indispensable to the critical functions of production, this Court is of the considered view that these reasons satisfy the test of reasonableness and; therefore, do not warrant any interference.
8. In the conspectus of above discussion and reasoning, this Court declines interference in this petition which stands dismissed sans cost.
(SHEEL NAGU) (HIRDESH)
JUDGE JUDGE
YS
Digitally signed by YOGESH KUMAR
SHIRVASTAVA
Date: 2023.06.13 12:00:06 +05'30'