Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

31. In the aforesaid context, we may refer to a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of K.A.Nagmani v. Indian Airlines and Others reported in [(2009) 5 SCC 515].

In that case the appellant was appointed as a Programmer with the Indian Airlines in the year 1984. The appellant was promoted to the higher post of Assistant Manager in the department of Electronic Data Processing (for short EDP ) in the year 1986 and confirmed in the said post in 1987. The EDP consisted of four divisions, namely, software, hardware, data communications and computer operations. Indian Airlines Officers Association vide its representations dated 19.9.1990 and 28.9.1990 suggested and requested the management to merge the hardware and software cadres and to prepare a common seniority list. A common seniority list dated 24.9.1990 was drawn for the purpose of promotions. Thereafter, interviews were held for the post of Deputy Manager, the said post was to be filled from the merged seniority list of hardware and software cadres. The management informed the appellant and others that their candidatures were considered for filling up the post of Deputy Manager. Thereafter, the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4 were selected for the post of Deputy Manager. The appellant unsuccessfully challenged the promotion of respondent nos.2, 3 and 4 as the writ petition filed by her was dismissed and confirmed in the Letters Patent Appeal by the Division Bench of the High Court. The main thrust of the submission before the Supreme Court by the appellant in person was that the promotion to the post of Deputy Manager could not have been made based on the terms of the settlement between the Indian Airlines and its Officers Association. It was submitted that Rule 4, Clause (d) of the Recruitment and Promotion Rules provided that within a department, employees would be divided into kindred occupational groups called cadres as shown in the Schedule to the Rules and seniority shall be on the basis of such cadres.