Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

8. The particulars furnished by the Government and the contesting parties would show the following historical facts of the case. According to the Government, from 1937 (if not earlier), the post of Probationary Revenue Inspector was a category in the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Services Rules. The said Rules provided for the qualifications, method of recruitment, training etc., in respect of the above post. Persons selected by direct recruitment as Probationary Revenue Inspectors were to undergo a training and given postings in various positions in terms of the said Rules. The Tamil Nadu Revenue Subordinate Service Rules, then in force, provided for two categories of posts viz., Tahsildars and Deputy Tahsildars. The post of Deputy Tahsildar was to be filled by transfer from various categories of posts including the probationary Revenue Inspectors. So far as the category of Probationary Revenue Inspector is concerned, once such a person completes the training and is found fit for selection as Deputy Tahsildar, the Rules provided that the selected Probationary Revenue Inspector will be placed on top of the list of Deputy Tahsildars both in the City and the District list. Thus, preferential treatment was given for several decades in favour of the Probationary Revenue Inspectors, which was a category in the Ministerial Service.

9. In 1964, the post of probationary Revenue Inspector was re-designated as Upper Division Clerk and later came to be redesignated as probationary Assistants. The qualification, method of selection, training etc., for these posts were the same as that of Probationary Revenue Inspectors. However, the Revenue Subordinate Service Rules which dealt with the post of Probationary Revenue Inspectors, was not correspondingly amended so as to substitute the post of Upper Division Clerk or Probationary Assistants. It is in these circumstances that there were certain disputes in certain cases result in the Government reviewing the matter in 1978 and taking a decision to make appropriate amendments. Although such a decision was taken by the Government in the year 1978, it took a long time for appropriate orders to be issued which ultimately culminated in G.O.Ms.No.884 Revenue Department dated 12-8-1992 followed by the statutory amendment in G.O. Ms.No. 133, Revenue Department dated 07-02-1995 resulting in preferential treatment in favour of the Probationary Assistants, who were earlier called as Probationary Revenue Inspectors. The comparative statements in respect of Selection category of posts (Rule 5) of Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules and the Revenue Subordinate Service Rules in respect of Category I and II (Rule 5 (f) are extracted hereunder:

12. It is not in dispute that the minimum educational qualification for the directly recruited Assistants through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in Group II Service is Graduation. It is the grievance of the directly recruited Assistants that direct recruitments are made once in blue moon and whereas in the department promotions are given immediately now and then as Assistant from the cadre of Junior Assistant. As a result of the same, the directly recruits on merit selection with degree were unable to get further promotion and number of people was not even able to reach the Tahsildar post till their retirement. As discussed earlier, originally there was no post of direct recruitment of Assistant with degree, whereas Probationary Revenue Inspectors were in vogue at least from 1911. Then onwards there was one line of promotee Assistant from the cadre of Junior Assistants and there was no direct recruitment of Assistants and they will be further promoted as Deputy Tahsildar. It is the grievance of the directly recruited Assistants that in the ladder of promotion, there was no chance of inducting a person on merit basis of graduation obviously for the reason that in those days graduates may not be available. Later on, on seeing the availability of graduates, they introduced a post called Probationary Revenue Inspector. The Probationary Revenue Inspectors were also, considering their graduation and other qualification, made eligible to become Deputy Tahsildars on completion of three years. Even while making them to become eligible as Deputy Tahsildar after merit selection, the directly recruited Probationary Revenue Inspectors will be placed first in the list. Even the said provision was deleted in 1977. It is further seen that by replacing the post of Probationary Revenue Inspector, the then Upper Division Clerk, presently Assistant posts through direct recruitment was introduced in G.O.Ms.No. 90 Revenue Department dated 8-01-1962 and rules were amended in G.O.Ms.No. 2813 Revenue dated 01-12-1964 and the post of Probationary Revenue Inspector came to be deleted in 1977. It is also the grievance of the directly recruited Assistants that there was no promotional opportunity for them. It is also their claim that when hundreds of vacancies of Assistants are filled up by promotion, one or two vacancies alone will be filled up by direct recruitment, which resulted in, rule 9 inoperative. Mr. C. Selvaraju, learned senior counsel, has also brought to our notice that out of 6000 Assistants throughout the State as on date in various Districts, only about 300 directly recruited Assistants are working. Based on the representation sent to the Board of Revenue and the Government, the Government, after accepting the proposal of the Board of Revenue, ultimately, issued order in G.O.Ms.No. 884, Revenue Department, dated 12-8-1992.

19. In the instant cases, though both parties are not equal because the applicants are non graduates and directly recruited Assistants are graduates, preferential treatment is given not by way of automatic promotion but by merit selection on the basis of graduation. As rightly pointed out, the old position of preference to the Probationary Revenue Inspector has been now given to the directly recruited Assistants because the latter are substitute to the Probationary Revenue Inspectors.