Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Shri Pramod Kumar Sharma vs Union Of India And Ors on 12 January, 2010
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
OA No. 2243/2008
MA No. 1676/2008
New Delhi, this the 12th day of January, 2010
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN
HONBLE MR. L.K.JOSHI, VICE CHAIRMAN (A)
1. Shri Pramod Kumar Sharma,
Private Secretary,
R/o 215, MEA Apartments,
C58/29, Sector 62,
Noida (UP)
2. Shri Raju Sharma,
Private Secretary,
R/o 403, Anandlok Apartments,
Mayur Vihar, Delhi-91
3. Shri Kuttanil Mathew John,
R/o Kuttanil House, Nedungadappally PO,
Kottayam, Kerala
4. Shri Rajeev Madaan,
R/o A-3/259, Paschim Vihar,
New Delhi-63
5. Shri V. Narayanan,
Private Secretary,
R/o Plot No.2, Srivarsha Nagar,
Trivendrum, Kerala
6. Shri Suresh Kumar,
Private Secretary,
R/o 73A, Sunlight Colony-11,
Hari Nagar Ashram, New Delhi
7. Shri Jaswant Kumar,
R/o F-97, Moti Bagh-I,
New Delhi
8. Shri Ashok Bhat,
Private Secretary,
R/o G-20, Oriental Villa, Sushant Lok-III,
Sector-57, Gurgaon
9. Shri Sanjeev Tandon,
Private Secretary,
R/o Flat No.656, GH-9, Paschim Vihar,
New Delhi Applicants
(By Advocate: Shri V.S.R. Krishna)
Versus
1. Union of India and ors.
Through the Foreign Secretary,
Ministry of External Affairs,
South Block, New Delhi
2. The Secretary,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi
3. Secretary, UPSC,
Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi through its Chairman Respondents
(By Advocate: Shri A.K. Bhardwaj, for respondents 1&2
Shri Naresh Kaushik with Ms. Manisha Badani, for
Respondent 3)
ORDER
Mr. L.K.Joshi, Vice Chairman (A) The issue for consideration in this OA is whether the Applicants, who belong to the Stenographers service of Indian Foreign Service (IFS) Group `B ministerial service, would be eligible for promotion to the Grade-I of general cadre as Under Secretary, Group `A non-ministerial on the basis of irrevocable options given on the basis of IFS Branch B (Recruitment, Cadre, Seniority and Promotion) Rules, 1964 (hereafter RRs 1964) as amended upto 4.03.2005 in spite of the fact that they were not in the zone of consideration for the aforesaid post till the RRs, 1964 were again amended by notification dated 16.10.2008 and the officials belonging to the Stenographers cadre became ineligible for promotion to the post of Under Secretary.
2. The facts of the case, in nuce, are that the Applicants are working under the Respondent, Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), in the grade of Private Secretaries in the cadre of IFS Group `B. Rule 12 of RRs 1964 provide that an officer of the Stenographer cadre in the Selection Grade would be eligible for promotion to the Grade-I of general cadre. The promotion would be made as per the aforesaid Rules on the basis of Limited Departmental Examination. The `IFS `B Stenographers Cadre, Principal Private Secretary Posts Recruitment Rules 1992 provide that a Private Secretary who had completed eight years qualifying service in the grade would be offered an option to undertake whether he/she wanted to be considered for promotion to the grade of Principal Private Secretary in the Stenographers cadre of IFS `B or to Grade I of general cadre of IFS `B i.e. Under Secretary. Accordingly, in accordance with the aforesaid Rule, the Respondent-MEA asked for options from the concerned officials by Office Memorandum (OM) dated 3.02.2003. The Applicants gave an option on and around 22.02.2003 for promotion to Grade I of general cadre of IFS `B. They had to give an undertaking in the option form that the option exercised by them would be final and no change of option would be permissible. The MEA issued another OM on 18.01.2006, which reads thus:
Consequent upon the decision of the Government to stop lateral entry of Private Secretaries to the General Cadre of the Central Secretariat Service at the level of Under Secretary, and its possible implication in the Indian Foreign Service, Branch (B), it has been decided to allow Private Secretaries who have opted to become Under Secretaries the option to confirm whether they wish to be considered for promotion to the grade of Principal Private Secretary.
2. Responses may please be sent to the undersigned within 2 weeks from the date of issue of this Office Memorandum.
3. The Applicants reconfirmed their option given earlier for promotion to the grade of Under Secretary. Subsequently the RRs, 1964 were amended by notification dated 16.10.2008 as follows:
2. In the Indian Foreign Service, Branch `B (Recruitment, Cadre Seniority and Promotion) Rules, 1964, in rule 12, for sub-rule (1), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely :-
(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), vacancies in Grade I of the General Cadre shall be filled by promotion of the regular officers of the Integrated Grades II and III of the General Cadre.
4. The Applicants are aggrieved by this amendment and are seeking the following relief:
a) To direct the respondents to consider them for promotion to the grade of Under Secretary in terms of the options exercised by them and to promote them in their turn and seniority strictly in accordance with statutory RRs.
5. The only contention on behalf of the Applicants urged by the learned counsel for the Applicants is that once an irrevocable option has been taken from the Applicants, the Respondents cannot now renege on this and deny them promotion to the grade of Under Secretary on the ground that the RRs, 1964 have been amended on 16.10.2008.
6. The learned counsel for the Respondents, on the other hand, would contend that the Respondent-MEA had made promotions in accordance with the unamended Rules till the year 2007-08, i.e., for vacancies occurring before amendment of RRs, 1964. It is also submitted that in the recruitment year 2008-09, no Private Secretary figured in the zone of consideration for promotion to Grade-I of IFS `B even for vacancies arising before notification on 17.10.2008. It is vehemently contended that the Private Secretaries were promoted to the post of Under Secretaries as long as the RRs, 1964 permitted. He would contend that the options were sought because the Private Secretaries earlier had two channels of promotion, i.e., either to the post of Principal Private Secretary or to the post of Under Secretary. It is submitted that the options were honoured as long as these two channels were available. After the amendment of the RRs, 1964, the question of promotion of the Private Secretaries to the post of Under Secretaries would not arise. It is contended that merely the act of opting would not give any indefeasible right to the Applicants to be considered for promotion to the post of Under Secretary de hors the RRs, 1964 as amended on 16.10.2008.
7. The learned counsel for the Respondents would also contend that the above decision was entirely in the domain of the executive as it related to the policy regarding promotions and the Tribunal would not interfere in a policy matter. Reliance has been placed on the judgement of the Honourable Supreme Court in P.U. Joshi & Ors. Vs. The Accountant General, Ahmedabad & Ors., 2003 (2) ATJ 624. The Honourable Supreme Court observed thus in the aforesaid judgement:
10. We have carefully considered the submissions made on behalf of both parties. Questions relating to the constitution, pattern, nomenclature of posts, cadres, categories, their creation/abolition, prescription of qualifications and other conditions of service including avenues of promotions and criteria to be fulfilled for such promotions pertain to the field of Policy and with in the exclusive discretion and jurisdiction of the State subject to course, to the limitations or restriction envisaged in the Constitution of India and it is not for the Statutory Tribunals, at any rate, to direct the Government to have a particular method of recruitment or eligibility criteria or avenues of promotion or impose itself by substituting its views for that of the State. Similarly, it is well open and within the competency of the State to change the rules relating to a service and alter or amend and vary by addition/subtraction the qualifications, eligibility criteria and other conditions of service including avenues of promotion, from time to time, as the administrative exigencies may need or necessitate. Likewise, the State by appropriate rules is entitled to amalgamate departments or bifurcate departments into more and constitute different categories of posts or cadres by underrating further classification, bifurcation or amalgamation as well as reconstitute and restructure the pattern and cadres/categories of service, as may be required from time to time by abolishing existing cadres/ posts and creating new cadres/posts. There is no right in any employee of the State to claim that rules governing conditions of his service should be forever the same as the one when he entered service for all purposes and except for ensuring or safeguarding rights or benefits already earned, acquired or accrued at a particular point of time, a Government servant has no right to challenge the authority of the State to amend, alter and bring into force new rules relating to even an existing service.
8. We are inclined to agree with the arguments of the learned counsel for the Respondents. When the RRs, 1964 provided for two channels of promotion for the Private Secretaries, the options could be asked. The irrevocability of the options would only be in the context of availability of two channels of promotion. Once the channel of promotion to the grade of Under Secretary has been closed for the Private Secretaries, the option would, so to say, evaporate. With the amendment in the Rules, the option has become infructuous. The Respondents have a right to amend the RRs in accordance with the administrative needs of the Government. It is settled law that in such matters the Tribunal would have no jurisdiction to interfere, unless the amendment is perverse or against the law. That not being the case, it is clear that there is no scope for interference in this case.
9. On the basis of above discussion, the OA is dismissed as wanting in merit. No costs.
( L.K. Joshi ) ( V.K. Bali )
Vice Chairman (A) Chairman
/dkm/