Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka Public Service ... vs Sri K. Mariswamy S/O Sri Sarappa on 22 February, 2007
Equivalent citations: ILR2007KAR4205, 2008(1)KARLJ378, 2007 LAB. I. C. 4444, 2007 (6) AIR KAR R 80 (2008) 1 KANT LJ 378, (2008) 1 KANT LJ 378
Bench: Chief Justice, B.S. Patil
JUDGMENT Cyriac Joseph, C.J.
1. This writ petition is filed against the order dated 10.04.2006 passed by Karnataka Administrative Tribunal in Application No. 1040 of 2003 which was filed by the respondent in this writ petition, The respondent filed the application praying to quash Anncxure-A1 notification issued by the Karnataka Public Service Commission (respondent No. 1 in the application and petitioner in this writ petition) in so far as it prescribed a first class bachelor degree in Ceramics as minimum qualification for the post of Lecturer in Ceramics. There was also a prayer for a direction to the Karnataka Public Service Commission to consider the application of the applicant without insisting on the qualification of first class bachelor's degree in Ceramics, The challenge against Annexure-A1 notification was on the basis that the recruitment to the post of Lecturers in Government Polytechnics in the Department of Technical Education is governed by the Karnataka Education Department Service (Technical Education Department) Recruitment Rules, 1987 and that according to the said Rules the minimum qualification for direct recruitment to the post of Lecturer in Ceramics is bachelor's degree in Ceramics with second class or equivalent qualification as approved by the Government of Karnataka. It was contended that the Karnataka Public Service Commission issued the impugned notification prescribing first class decree in Ceramics as minimum qualification contrary to the requirements under the Recruitment Rules. According to the applicant, neither the Government nor the Public Service Commission was competent to insist on a qualification which was not prescribed under the Recruitment Rules.
2. The Karnataka Public Service Commission justified Annexure-A1 notification, relying on the provisions contained in Rule 2 of the Recruitment Rules, 1987 which reads as under:
2. Method of recruitment and minimum qualification;-
(a) In respect of each category of posts specified in column (1) of schedule below, the method of recruitment and minimum qualification, if any, shall be as specified in the corresponding entries in column (2) and (3) thereof:
(b) Posts for which All India Council for Technical Education has prescribed/ recommended minimum qualification the same qualification shall apply to these posts. In respect of other posts not covered by All India Council for Technical Education the qualification as prescribed in these Rules shall apply.
It was also pointed out that AICTE pay-scales as revised from 01.04.1999 were extended to teachers of aided polytechnics as per Government Order No. ED 15 DTE 2000 dated 28.07.2000. Paragraph 12 of the said Government Order deals with recruitment and qualification. As per paragraph 12(1), the prescribed minimum qualification and experience requirements for various teaching posts in Diploma level technical institutions shall be as prescribed by AICTE and modified in Appendix-A. Appendix-A pertaining to the post of Lecturer provided that the qualification for the post of Lecturer is first class bachelor's degree in appropriate branch of engineering/technology or first class master's degree in humanities and sciences. Hence it was contended by the Public Service Commission that in view of Rule 2(b) of the Recruitment Rules, 1987, the Public Service Commission was right and justified in insisting on first class degree qualification which was prescribed by the All India Council for Technical Education for the post of Lecturers.
3. However, the Tribunal held that Annexure-A1 notification was liable to be quashed as it was contrary to the Recruitment Rules, 1987. The Tribunal noted that as per the Schedule to the Recruitment Rules, the qualification for direct recruitment to the post of Lecturer in Ceramics is only a second class bachelor's degree in Ceramics or equivalent qualification as approved by the Government of Karnataka. According to the Tribunal, unless and until the Recruitment Rules are amended prescribing first class bachelor's degree as the minimum qualification for direct recruitment, the Public Service Commission cannot insist on the minimum qualification of first class bachelor's degree prescribed by the AICTE. According to the Tribunal the recruitment has to be made on the basis of the provisions contained in the Recruitment Rules and not on the basis of the qualifications prescribed by the AICTE. Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed the impugned notification as far as the applicant was concerned and directed the respondents to consider the selection and appointment of the applicant as Lecturer in Ceramics if he was otherwise not found ineligible. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the Public Service Commission has filed this writ petition.
4. While admitting the writ petition on 05.07.2006, operation of the impugned order of the Tribunal was stayed until further orders.
5. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent, we find that while passing the impugned order the Tribunal failed to take note of Rule 2(b) of the Recruitment Rules, 1987 though it was specifically pointed out by the counsel for the Public Service Commission, According to Rule 2(b), a post for which All India Council for Technical Education has prescribed or recommended minimum qualification, the same qualification shall apply. Only when the AICTE has not prescribed or recommended the minimum qualification, the qualification prescribed in the schedule to the Recruitment Rules will apply. Admittedly, the All India Council for Technical Education has prescribed the minimum qualification of first class bachelor's degree for the post of Lecturer in Ceramics in Polytechnics, The Government have extended the AICTE pay-scales to teachers of aided polytechnics as per Government Order dated 28.07.2000. In the same Government Order, it has been provided that the prescribed minimum qualification and experience requirement for various teaching posts in Diploma level technical institutions shall be as prescribed by the AICTE and modified in Appendix-A to the Government Order. In Appendix-A to the Government Order, the qualification prescribed for the post of Lecturer is first class bachelor's degree in appropriate branch of engineering/technology. Thus considering the provisions contained in Rule 2(b) of the Recruitment Rules, 1987 and the Government Order ED 15 DTE 2000 dated 28.07.2000, it cannot be said that the Public Service Commission was wrong in insisting on the minimum qualification of first class bachelor's degree for the post of Lecturer in Ceramics. Therefore, the Tribunal erred in quashing Anncxure-A1 notification and directing the Public Service Commission to consider the applicant's application for the post of Lecturer in Ceramics.
6. Learned Counsel for the respondent invited our attention to paragraph 12(4) of the Government Order dated 28.07.2000 which provides as follows:
12(4) Teachers already in service prior to April 1999 and who at the time of their recruitment possess only a second class in their degree at Bachelor's or Master's level (but met all the qualifications prescribed by the AICTE at the time of their recruitment) shall be exempted from the requirement of first class degree they had at the time of their recruitment.
Learned Counsel contended that since the respondent was already a teacher in the aided polytechnic, he stood exempted from the requirement of first class bachelor's degree. Though such a contention was not raised in the application and was not considered by the Tribunal, we find it proper and necessary to deal with this contention also. The above quoted provision in the Government Order grants exemption to the teachers already in service prior to 01.04.1999, to continue to hold the post, notwithstanding the implementation of the AICTE pay-scales. It is not a provision intended to grant exemption to any candidate applying for direct recruitment to the post. Hence the respondent cannot claim any exemption from the requirement of first class bachelor's degree on the basis of paragraph 12(4) of the Government Order dated 28.07.2000.
7. Learned Counsel for the respondent pointed out that in the earlier Applications Nos. 583 of 1999 and 4641 of 1991 filed by the respondent challenging the earlier notifications issued by the KPSC on 15.12.1995 and 22.10.1998, prescribing first class bachelor's degree as minimum qualification, the Tribunal had held that without amending the Recruitment Rules, 1987, the Public Service Commission cannot insist on a higher qualification for recruitment on the basis that the AICTE has prescribed first class bachelor's degree as the minimum qualification. According to the learned Counsel, the Public Service Commission did not question the orders passed by the Tribunal in Applications Nos. 583 of 1999 and 4641 of 1998 and therefore, the Public Service Commission is bound by the said orders and hence the Public Service Commission could not have and should not have issued Annexure-A1 notification. Even if the Public Service Commission had not questioned the correctness of the orders dated 08.03.1999 passed in Application Nos. 583 of 1999 and 4641 of 1998, we do not consider it proper to uphold the order of the Tribunal, as it is patently wrong and was passed without taking note of Rule 2(b) of the Recruitment Rules, 1987, As we have found that the prescription of first class bachelor's degree as minimum qualification for the post of Lecturer in Ceramics is in conformity with the provisions contained in the Recruitment Rules, 1987, the failure of the Public Service Commission to question the earlier order dated 08.03.1999 of the Tribunal need not deter us from setting aside the order of the Tribunal impugned in this writ petition. Action of the Public Service Commission is also in conformity with the Government Order dated 28.07.2000 which again is in conformity with the Recruitment Rules, 1987.
8. There is one more aspect to be mentioned with regard to the direction in the impugned order of the Tribunal. Even assuming that Annexure-A1 notification was liable to be quashed for the reason that first class bachelor's degree was not required for the post of Lecturer in Ceramics, the proper course would have been to quash the notification and to direct the Public Service Commission to issue fresh notification prescribing the correct qualification, so that everybody who is eligible got an opportunity to apply. By quashing the notification as far as the applicant is concerned and by directing the Public Service Commission to consider him for selection, the Tribunal has confined the selection to the applicant and has excluded from consideration every other prospective candidate who would have been eligible and would have applied if the qualification mentioned in the notification was only second class bachelor's degree. For this reason also, the impugned order is wrong and illegal.
9. For the reasons stated above, the impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside. Writ petition stands allowed and Application No. 1043 of 2003 stands dismissed.