Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

shows that as per the Rules that were framed pursuant to the Resolution dated 13-7-1987, the appointment to the post of Deputy Municipal Commissioner was made by promotion of a person holding the post of head of major department, by promotion of persons who are holding post of ward officer or by direct recruitment by selection of a person who is holding required qualification. The ratio was 1:1. It means that 50% of the posts were to be filled in by promoting head of major department and 50% of the posts were to be filled in by promotion of ward officer. By the Resolution No.531 dated 21-9-2000, modifications were suggested. Two categories were maintained as it is, namely promotion for ward officer and promotion for head of the major department. Appointment by selection was permitted, however, only if the Corporation thought it to be necessary and it was only to the extent of 25% of the total strength of Dy.Municipal Commissioners. One more category was added, namely by transfer on deputation by the State Government. But as observed above, this proposal was not sanctioned till the Resolution No.752 dated 20th November, 2003 was passed. The modification suggested by the Resolution No. 752 dated 20th November, 2003 was that the post of Deputy Municipal Commissioner was to be filled in by promotion from head of the department from Asst.Municipal Commissioner/ Ward Officer, by direct recruitment and also by transfer on deputation. By transfer on deputation, the post was to be filled in only when the Corporation thinks it necessary. It was further provided that the quota would be 3:1. It appears from that Resolution that 75% of posts were to be filled in by promotion from Asst.Commissioners/Ward Officers and 25% posts were to be filled in by promotion of head of the Department. Though, it was provided that the Corporation may fill in maximum 25% of the posts by direct recruitment, if the administration feels that it is necessary to do so and also by transfer. There was no specific quota allotted to them. The roaster that was suggested was, first vacancy to be filled in by promotion of Asst.Commissioner, second vacancy to ig be filled in by promotion of Asst.Commissioner, third vacancy to be filled in by promotion from Head of the Major Department. The Government by its letter dated 4th October, 2006 sanctioned the modification suggested by the Resolution No. 752 dated 20th November, 2003 with certain modifications. Relevant portion of the Government Resolution sanctioning the Resolution No.752 dated 20th November, 2003 reads as under:-

The Roaster point of Promotion in the proposal, be made applicable at the Ration 75:25 for A & chronologically given as below, as proposed by the Corporation:-

       A-   (From    the     Cadre       Asstt.Municipal

       Commissioner)





       A.        (From         the              Cadre             of

Asstt.Municipal Commissioner) B. (From HOD/Direct Recruit from MPSC/Govt.Deputation) B. (From the Cadre of Asst.Municipal Commissioner) 3 It is clear that the Government did not sanction what was proposed by Resolution No.752 as it is. Modifications made by the Government were that 75% of the vacancies were to be filled in by promotion of Asst.Municipal Commissioner and 25% of the vacancies were to be filled in by promotion of head of the department, by direct recruitment and also by taking a person on deputation. Thus in the proposal though there was no specific quota earmarked for direct recruitment and personnel to be on deputation, the Government categorically laid down that 25% quota is earmarked for the Head of the Department, direct recruits and for deputation, and the Government also approved the roaster accordingly. The roaster approved by the Government is that the first vacancy is to go to the Asst.Municipal Commissioner, second vacancy is also to go to the Asst.Municipal Commissioner and third vacancy will be filled either by promotion of H.O.D. Or by direct recruit by Maharashtra Public Service Commission or by accepting a person on deputation from the State Government.

     .           In      view      of        this         submission,

     therefore,       the       question     that        arises           for




                                                                      

consideration is whether the quota fixed by the amended Rule and the Roaster which is a part of that Rule applies to the existing vacancy or to the total compliments of the posts. In our opinion, the submission of the Corporation that the Roaster which is given in the Rule will not operate in relation to the existing vacancy is not well founded.

It is further to be seen here that the State Government by its sanction letter has also prescribed the Roaster. Perusal of that Roaster does not leave one in any doubt that the Roaster will have to be operated in relation to the existing vacancy and the first vacancy in the post of Deputy Municipal Commissioner, which is to be filled in after the Rule comes into force, will have to be filled in by promoting the person from the cadre of Asst.Municipal Commissioner. In our opinion, therefore, the Corporation will have to apply the roaster found in the Rules to the vacancies which are existing and are to be filled in.