CHAIRMAN AND M.D. SINGARENI COLLIERIES AND ANR. versus M. RAMESH CHANDER AND ORS.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 647 · Decided: 22-11-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. SAWANT

Judgment (excerpt)

CHAIRMAN AND M.D. SINGARENI COLLIERIES AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
M. RAMESH CHANDER AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 22, 1994 
[P.B. SA WANT AND N.P. SINGH, JJ.] 
B 
SERVICE LAW-Mines Ru/es-i<.ule 72-Recruitment-Posts of 
Welfare Officers Cadre Career Plan-Policy decision to fill up I/3rd posts 
by internal candidates and rest by external candidates-Procedure of 
appointment by selecting internal candidates before external candidates are 
selected-Whether proper-Held, yes. 
C 
SERVICE LAW-Recruitment-Quota fixed for both internal and 
external candidates-Common test held-Procedure of appointment 
challenged-Method of selection cannot vary according to results of tests 
held 
The dispute relates to the recruitment to the statutory posts of 
Welfare Officers, the appointments to which are to be mad~ in the 
mines under Rule 72 of the Mines Rules. 
D 
Coal India Limited introduced w.e.f. 23.9.1988 a Cadre Career 
Plan for Welfare Officers and took a policy decision that l/3rd posts of E 
the Welfare Officers should be filled up by internal candidates and the 
rest by the external candidates. The Appellant Company changed its 
recruitment policy by modifying the existing ratio of 1:1 between 
internal and external candidates to 33-1/3:66-2/3. The Company issued 
an advertisement inviting applications for 28 posts of Welfare Officer 
on the basis of said quota for internal and external candidates. A F 
common written test was conducted and a merit list was displayed. 
While preparing the said common list both of internal and external 
candidates, the internal candidates were first selected for ten out of 28 
posts on the basis of the quota of 33-1/3 per cent and on the basis of 
merit and the rules of reservation. The selection to the balance 18 posts G 
falling in the quota of direct recruits, viz., 66-2/3 per cent, was also 
made on the basis of merit and the rule of reservation from all the 
candidates, viz., internal and external. It is this selection which was 
challenged before the High Court by way of Writ Petitions. These 
appeals have been filed against the judgment of the High Court 
allowing the Writ petitions. 
H 
647 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
648 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1994] SUPP. 5 S.C.R 
The appellant-company submitted that it has been giving a fair 
opportunity t.o both internal and external candidates on the basis of the 
present quota fixed between them since 1989. The posts to the extent of 
33-1/3 per cent are exclusively kept for internal candidates by selecting 
those many candidates from the internal pool, and the balance of 66-2/3 
per cent of the common pool are thrown open both for internal and 
external candidates. Thus on account of this procedure, the internal 
candi:lates stand a chance of getting a larger share in the appointment 
to the said posts exceeding even their quota. In any case, the internal 
candidates cannot approach the Court for direction to the company to 
follow a different procedure so long as their quota is not reduced and 
they are not denied the opportunity to complete for the posts reserved 
for the external candidates. 
The respondents claimed that there should be no reservation either 
while selecting the internal or external candidates in their respective 
quota, and that the external .:andidates should be selected before the 
internal candidates are selected. Respondents took contradictory stands 
in that behalf before this Court and the High Court. They contended 
for selection of external candidates first as that may give them some 
additional advantage because of the results of the present test. Allowing 
the appeal, this Court 
HELD: 1. In fact the procedure followed by the company viz.,of 
first selecting the internal candidates for their quota of 33-1/3 per cent 
from the. common merit list and thereafter selecting the external 
candidates, works out to the advantage of the internal candidates since 
after securing the quota which is already reserved for them, they also 
stand a chance to get more posts in the quota meant for the external 
candidates for which they are allowed to compete. It must be 
understood when the internal candidates are selected in their quota, 
that they are so selected from among the competing internal candidates 
in the common merit list. This means that the internal candidates up to 
their quota are first selected even if they secure less marks than the 
external candidates in the common merit list. It is thereafter that the 
selection of the external cand

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.