Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Manoj Kumar Mittal vs Union Of India & Ors Through on 15 September, 2011
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH OA 4417/2010 NEW DELHI THIS THE 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011 HONBLE MR. G. GEORGE PARACKEN, MEMBER (J) HONBLE DR. RAMESH CHANDRA PANDA, MEMBER (A) 1. Manoj Kumar Mittal, S/o Shri O.P. Mittal, R/o G-1/33, Sector 15, Rohini, Delhi. 2. Sh. KP Uday Shankar, S/o PU Govindan Kutty Nair, R/o Block N-164, Sector VIII, R.K. Puram, New Delhi-110 022. Applicants. (By Advocate Shri M.K. Bhardwaj) VERSUS Union of India & Ors through 1. The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Director General, National Crime Records Bureau, East Block-7, R.K. Puram, New Delhi. 3. The Secretary, M/o Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension, DOPT, North Block, New Delhi. 4. The Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, UPSC House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi. Respondents. (By Advocate Shri S.M. Zulfiqar Alam for Respondents 1-3, Shri Naresh Kaushik for Respondent No.4) ORDER (ORAL)
Mr. G. George Paracken:
The applicants are presently working as Data Processing Grade-B with Respondent No. 2, namely, the National Crimes Records Bureau (`NCRB for short). According to them, the said Respondent is trying to close their promotional avenues in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner in the guise of amendment to the Recruitment Rules for the post of Junior Staff Officer (`JSO for short) in its Computer and Systems Division. By the proposed amendment, they want to prescribe the same educational qualifications prescribed for direct recruits in the case of promotees also in spite of the fact that the Respondent No. 3, namely, the DOP&T has recommended that the applicability of qualifications for direct recruits should not be insisted upon in case of promotion to the post of JSO. As regards the Respondent No. 4, namely, UPSC is also concerned, their stand is that if the NCRB is still insisting upon the same qualifications prescribed for direct recruits to promotees also, then they should consider incorporating a saving clause to protect the interest of the existing incumbents in the grade of Data Processing Assistant Grade B. The applicants in this Original Application have, therefore, sought directions to the NCRB to notify the recruitment rules for the post of JSO incorporating the aforesaid recommendations of either Respondent No. 3 or the saving clause as suggested by Respondent No. 4. Further, they have sought a direction to the respondents to give them one years time to acquire the desired PG diploma in the relevant fields.
2. However, the respondent NCRB has informed the UPSC, vide their letter dated 18.06.2010, that keeping in view the interest of the organization and in enhancing the quality of manpower especially at the entry level of Group `A posts of Computer and Systems Division i.e. JSO in the light of co-ordination of monitoring of Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems Project by them, personnel with the requisite technical expertise in the grade of JSO will be required to look after the present and future requirements of the project including the responsibility to carry out and manage development of core application software and enable the Government to retain the strategic control of the Core Application Software and other assets including the Source Code. Therefore, at least Post Graduation Diploma in a relevant discipline from a recognized University or Institute has been prescribed as the Essential Qualifications. Considering the organizational requirements, the UPSC has also approved aforesaid qualification as the educational qualification required for promotion to the post of JSO.
3. The Respondent No. 2, namely, the NCRB in its reply has submitted that the existing recruitment rules for the post of JSO were notified in the year 1988, when the computer technology had not seen much growth. Hence, the qualifications prescribed for direct recruitments in the post of JSO did not demand any high-end qualifications which have become so much an integral part of any computer professional of the preset day. To cope up with the work culture and functional necessity of the post of JSO in the present circumstances, at least a PG Diploma is to be made as the essential qualification. Hence, there is no illegality and irrationality in prescribing such minimum qualification for a Group A Gazetted entry level post. They have also submitted that both the applicants in this OA along with the other Sub-Inspectors (re-designated as DPA-A) were promoted to the post of DPA-B (before re-designation, DPA-B was known as Inspector) with effect from 13.06.2005 giving one time relaxation and waiving the qualifications which was otherwise compulsory for promotion for the post of Inspector because a considerable number of Sub Inspectors/DPA-A were not possessing the requisite qualifications for promotion as prescribed in the RRs for the post of Inspector. According to them, if no minimum qualification is prescribed for promotion to the post of JSO, those incumbents who have been given one time relaxation to get promoted to the post of DPA-B also would become eligible for the post of JSO.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. From the reliefs sought by the applicants, it is seen that they have no objection per se for amendment of the recruitment rules. Their only submission is that the amendment shall be carried out incorporating the recommendation of either the Respondent No. 3 or the Respondent No. 4 in the amended recruitment rules. In our considered view, interference of this Tribunal in the matter is not called for. It is entirely for the Department concerned to make the Recruitment Rules for the posts under them in accordance with their specific requirements. This is what the Honble Apex Court has also held in its judgment in P.U. Joshi & Ors. Vs. The Accountant General, Ahmedabad & Ors. (Appeal (Civil) No. 10983 of 1996) wherein it has been held as under:
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 within the exclusive discretion and jurisdiction of the State, subject, of course, to the limitations or restrictions 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 undertaking 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 ahs no right to challenge the authority of the State to amend, alter and bring into force new rules relating to even an existing service.
5. This Tribunal has also considered the aforesaid issue in OA 2243/2008 Pramod Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India & Ors. decided on 12.01.2010 and held as under:
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.
6. In view of the above position, we do not intend to interfere with the amendment of the recruitment rules being framed by the NCRB for the post of JSO. However, the alternative prayer of the applicants to grant them a years time or so to enable them to acquire the prescribed qualification for the post of JSO and make themselves eligible for consideration for promotion to the said post in accordance with the amended recruitment rules may be considered by the respondents and communicate their decision to them within a period of three months. This OA is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
( Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda ) ( G. George Paracken )
Member (A) Member (J)
SRD