Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Proficiency computer in Malkiat Singh And Ors. vs Panjab University And Ors. on 23 February, 2007Matching Fragments
3. Mr RD Bawa, Advocate, learned Counsel for the review applicants has submitted that Class - 'C' employees of the Univesity could be promoted against the 20% quota provided that they qualify the Typewriting Test (English) with the minimum speed of 30 w.p.m. or Data Entry (Computer Proficiency including Word Processing) Test. However, as per the decision of the University, a temporary arrangement had been made that they can be promoted to the abovesaid posts of Clerks within their 20% quota if they have the requisite qualification of Matriculate and 5 years experience of service in the University. In terms of the said temporary arrangement, the review applicants were not required to qualify the Typewriting Test. This decision to make promotions on temporary basis against the 20% quota of in service employees without qualifying the test was taken in a meeting of the Committee dated 16.9.1999. It is submitted that though it was provided that the Class 'C' employees could be promoted to Class 'B' posts as a temporary arrangement, however, it was also provided that the persons so appointed as Clerks on temporary basis if they do not qualify the Typewriting Test (English) within one year, they would be reverted to their substantive posts. The said proposal, it is stated, was considered in a meeting held on 26.7.2000 and Clause (ii) which provided for qualifying the Typewriting Test (English) was dropped. Therefore, it is contended that the review applicants are entitled to continue on the posts of Clerks de hors the statement made by the counsel for the respondent-University.
4. In response, Mr Anupam Gupta, Advocate, learned Counsel appearing for the University has submitted that no ground is made out for reviewing the judgment passed by this Court on 22.5.2003. It is submitted that in terms of the seniority list of in-service Class 'C' employees, 19 persons were appointed as officiating Clerks by way of ad hoc arrangement to fill in the prescribed 20% quota of Class 'C' employees upto 31.12.2002. The said appointment letters inter alia provided that the appointment was on the condition that the promoted employee would have to qualify the Typewriting Test (English) with a minimum speed of 30 w.p.m. or Data Entry (Computer Proficiency) Test. Their services would be regularized only after they qualify the prescribed test and the seniority would be fixed accordingly. Accordingly, vide circular dated 21.1.2003, it was proposed to conduct the Typewriting Test (English) with the minimum speed of 30 w.p.m. and Data Entry Test (Computer Proficiency including Word Processing) Test for consideration for appointment to the posts of Clerks from the in-service Class 'C' employees after obtaining applications afresh from all the eligible Class 'C' employees. It is submitted that the persons who had not qualified the prescribed test were asked to appear before the Selection Committee constituted by the Vice Chancellor for interview. The recommendations of the Selection Committee were approved by the Vice Chancellor who is the competent appointing authority for the posts of Clerks. In terms of the judgment, the review of which is sought, the Vice Chancellor reverted the officiating Clerks who were promoted from the in service Class 'C' employees against 20% reserved quota under Rule 3(c). The review applicants even after being granted an opportunity to pass the necessary test, except for one either failed to pass the test or did not avail of the opportunity to appear in the requisite test even on the second occasion for which again an opportunity was given. Therefore, it is submitted that the review applicants have no right whatsoever to seek review of the judgment passed by this Court. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter. The primary contention that has been raised by the learned Counsel for the review applicants is that the review applicants are entitled to continue on the Class 'B' posts of Clerks even though they do not qualify the necessary Typewriting Test (English) or the Data Entry Test for appointment to the posts of Clerks from amongst the in-service Class 'C' employees. Rule 3(c) reads as under:
3. xxx xxx Provided that for recruitment of Clerks, the percentage of reservation shall be available to the following categories of candidates:
(a) xxx xxx
(b) xxx xxx
(c) In-service Class C employees of the University who are matriculates and have a minimum of 5 years service in the University provided they qualify the type writing test (English) with a minimum speed of 30 w.p.m. or Data Entry (Computer Proficiency including Word Processing) Test.
However, ad hoc arrangement within the quota of Class 'C' employees for the post of Clerks be made on the basis of seniority (i.e. the senior most person in the category of all Class 'C' employees) provided the incumbent is atleast Matriculate and has five years experience in the University.
5. It is, therefore, apparent from a perusal of the Rules that passing of the necessary Typewriting Test (English) with a minimum speed of 30 w.p.m. or Data Entry (Computer Proficiency including Word Processing) Test is an essential condition and requirement of the Rules. In any case, as per the seniority list of in-service Class 'C' employees as prepared in response to the afore-mentioned circular dated 20.4.2001 which was approved by the Vice Chancellor, 19 persons were offered appointment as officiating Clerks by way of ad hoc arrangement to fill in the prescribed 20% quota of Class 'C' employees upto 31.12.2002. The appointment letters issued to these employees inter alia also provided, "that this appointment is on the condition that you will have to qualify the type-writing test (English) with a minimum speed of 30 w.p.m. or Data Entry (Computer Proficiency) test and your service will be regularized only after you qualify the prescribed test and the seniority will be fixed accordingly". Accordingly, vide circular dated 21.1.2003, it was proposed to conduct the aforesaid Typewriting Test (English) and Data Entry Test for the appointment to the posts of Clerks from amongst the in-service Class 'C' employees after inviting applications afresh from eligible Class 'C' employees. The 19 officiating Clerks who were appointed on seniority basis as an ad hoc arrangement were also asked to appear along with other eligible in-service Class - 'C' employees vide circular dated 29.1.2003. The Typewriting Test was held on 24.5.2003 and the Data Entry Test was held on 23.5.2003. This was held after the passing of the order by this Court on 22.5.2003, the concluding part of which reads as under: