LexG.K. MOHAN AND ORS versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
G.K. MOHAN AND ORS A V. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS OCTOBER 12, 2007 [A.K.MATHURANDMARKANDEYKATJU,JJ.] B ~ ~ Constitution of India, 1950-Article 14-Categorization-Class of persons-Under Rule 6(4)(a) chargemen grade II possessing requisite qualifications in terms of Schedule Ill placed in grade 2 of c category II and those not possessing, in Grade 4 of category}-- Challenge to, on the ground of violation of Article 14-Held: There is no violation of Article 14-Categorization can be done on basis of educational qualifications-Article 14 applies within same class-,-Plea that Draughtsmen grade II have been placed better off vis-a-vis D )-. erstwhile charge men grade II not having qualification not sustainable as both are two different class-Defence Research and Development ,,) Organisation, Technical Cadre Recruitment Rules, 1995-Rule 6(4)(a). In terms of Rule 6(4)(a) of the Defence Researc~ and Development Organization, Technical Cadre Recruitment ules, E 1995, Chargemen grade II who possessed the qualifications as prescribed in Schedule III were placed in grade 2 of category :0. while those who did not possess the same were placed in grade 4 of category I. Appellants-Chargemen grade II did not possess the F qualifications as prescribed and were placed in grade 4 of category __. I. Appellants filed application seeking quashing of Rule 6( 4)( a) being 'r - violative of Articles 14and16 of the Constitution on the ground that under the Rules the erstwhile Chargemen grade II were divided into two categories, namely, those who possessed the qualifica~ions in G schedule III and those who did not. It sought direction to place the appellants in grade 2 of category II with all consequential benefits. Applications as also writ petitions were dismissed. Hence the present appeals. 193 H 194 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 11 S.C.R. A Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 There can be categorization on the basis of educational qualifications. The erstwhile Chargemen grade II who had the qualifications mentioned in Schedule III have been placed in a higher category while those like the appellants who do not have B the said qualifications have been placed in the lower category. There is no violation of Article 14 on such a categorization. ~ (Paras 8 and 9] (196-B-D] 1.2. Article 14 applies within the same class. The submission c that the Draughtsmen grade II have been placed better off by the Note to Rule 6(4)(a) vis-a-vis the erstwhile Chargemen grade II who did not have the qualifications in Schedule III cannot be accepted. Draughtsman and Chargeman are two different classes, and hen~e there is no question of discrimination between them. D (Paras 10and11] [196-D-E] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 5045- 5100of2001. From the Final Order dated 15.2.2001 of the High Court of E Karnataka at Bangalore in W.P. Nos. 11728-55/2000, 11701-727/2000 and 10723/2000. G. Umapathy, A. Leo G. Rozario and Rakesh K. Sharma for the Appellants. F Ashok Bhan, R.S. Rana, Aman Sinha, R.C. Kathia and B.V. Balaram Das for the Respondents. t- The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MARKANDEY KAT JU, J. I. These appeals have been filed G against the final judgment and orders of the Karnataka High Court dated 15.2.2001 inW.P.Nos.11728-755/2000,CWW.P.Nos.11701-11727/ 2000 & W.P . .No. 10723/2000. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. H 3. The appellants before us filed O.A. Nos. 1040/1998, 1055-1081/ G.K. MOHAN v. UNION OF INDIA 195 (MARKANDEY KA TJU, J.] 1998 etc. before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench A seeking a direction to quash Rule 6(4)(a) of the Defence Research & Development Organization, Technical Cadre Recruit.Jlent Rules; 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') as being violative of Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution, and for a direction to place the applicants/appellants in grade II of category II with effect from 26.8.1995 with all consequ,ential B benefits. ~ 4. The applicants (appellants before us) were Chargemen grade II in the service of the Union oflndia, Ministry of Defence. The Union of ~ India introduced the aforesaid Rule on 26.8.1995. We are, however, only concerned with Rule 6(4)(a) which states as under: c "(4) (a). All persons holding the posts of Chief Glass Blower, Artist- cum-Photographer, Commercial Artist, Junior Scientific Assistant Grade I, Chargeman Grade II and
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.