LexH. C. SHARMA AND OTHERS versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A .B c D E F G H 372 H. C. SHARMA AND OTHERS. v • . MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND OTHERS July 13, 1983 V.D. TU,LZAPURKAR AND A. VARADARAJAN, JJ. ConstitutiOn of India-Arts. 14 and 16-Scope of-Carving out two classes in· the sa1ne category on the ~asis nierely of qualification- n~t perniissib!e. Deihl Municipal Corporation Act, 1957-Secs. 47 and 480(2)-sCope of- Delhi Municipal Corporatioit-A statutory authorUy-Not bound by policy of C.P.1V.D. unless adopted by its resolution. Recruitment ·Regulations dated 27.6.19?0 made with approval of Central_ Government under sec. 480(2) Appli- cable prospectively, Appointment" of Assistant Engineers (Civil)-Quota rule- 50 per cent by pro1notion and 50 per cent by direct recruittnent-Validity of. Appoint1nent of Jr. Engineers as Assistant Engineers on curre.nt duty charge basis for long periods.-:-lrregu/ar. TI1e first respondent, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, put up an advertisen1ent in the press on 30·12~1978 for filling up 8 posts of Assistant Engineers (Civil) by direct recruitment. PUrsuant to the interviews held in this \"Jehalf a list of selected candidate3 out of Graduate Junior Engineers was prepared and approved On 2.5.1979. The list was pending final decision about the appointment of the direct recruits selected for these 8 posts. By its office order dated 10.4.1978 the first respondent entrusted 6 diploma holders Junior. Engineers with current duty charge of the posts of Assistant Engine"ers and by office order dated 21.6.1979 pron1oted two diplon1a holder Junior .Engineers as Assistant Engineers on current duty charge. Feeling that the proposed direct recruitment would be detrimental to their interest, the petitioners, who were diploma holder Junior Engineers of the first respondent, filed writ petition No. 221 of 1979 under Art. 32 of the Constitution, praying for dfrections to be issued to the first respondent to restrain the first respondent from recruiting Assi~tant Engineers directly; to give effect to the recomn1endations of the.Third Pay Commission regarding the rules and policy of promotion etc; to reckon the seniority of the petitioners with their length of service and not to affect in any manner all those holding adhoc charge a:nd current duty cha"rge. The petitioners also_ prayed for quashing the seniority list dated 2.9.1978 (Annexure Gin writ petition 1194 of 1979), The petitioners contended that the first respondent should have suspended the direct recruitment of Assistant Engineers and that the rule prescribing a quota of 50 per cent by promotion and 50 per cent by direct recruitment laid down in the recruitment regulations dated 27.6.1970 should not be followed. The petitioners submitted that the first respondent Corporation had been following the pattern of functioning current in the Centcal Public Works Department (C.P.W.D.) in all matters of recruit· µientf ?roµiotion anQ <?ther ~9ndit~ons. The <;:.P.W.p. ha~ d~cided in Au~ust~ , . t ·- • - -"'. H.C. SHARMA V. MUNICIPAL CORPN. 373 I 1975 to suspend direct recruitment in Central Engineering Service w.e.f. 1.4.1972". The first respondent had taken a( deci~ion by passing resol.utions in 1970 and 1971 to the e:Tect that all fundamental rules and supplementary rules including a"mendmcnts and orders issued by the Central Government shall be treated as rules. etc. issued by respondent I. The Central Government had power of general superintendence over the first respondent and it had informed the first respondent by letter dated 23.2.1976 that consequent upon recommen- dations of the Third Pay Commission direct recruitm.ent may be banned by respondent I as had been dolle by the C.P.W.D. The 27th respondent in writ petition 1194 of 1979 contended ·that since there were only 60 posts of Civil Engineers when the Recruitn1ent Regulations dated 27:6.1970 were made those Regulations could apply only to 60 posts of Assistant Engineers and direct recruits would be entitled· to only 30 posts and they were not entitled to further posts by direct recruitn1ent now as they had already been given 3~ posts. The graduate Junior Engineers whose naffies were on the select list, along with others, filed writ petition No. 1194 of 1979 under Art. 32 _of the Constitution praying for directions to be issued tO the first respondent to fill up 8 posts of Assistnnt Engineers from amongst those in the Select Panel; to fill up the remaining posts of Assista
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.