LexP. G. JOSHI AND ORS, ETC. ETC. versus THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS, NEW DELHI, ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
.- A B c 115 P. G. JOSHI AND ORS, ETC. ETC. v. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, POSTS AND TELEGRAPHS, NJ::W · DELHI, ETC. September 20, ·1974 [A. N. RAY, C.J., K. K. MATHEW, Y. v. CHANDRACHUD, A. ALAO!R!• SWAMI AND A. C. GUPTA JJ,] Posts a11d Teleg1·apli.1 Ma1111al Vol 4 (Estab/is/1111e11ts) r, 219/4-Scopc of- Test for ·s~parate Cadre'-'Rotational Tra11sfer'. meaning of, Certain clerks in the Posts and Telegraphs Department, were selected and appointed as Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors under rules 279 /4 promulgated by the Director General of Posts and Telegraphs. ·When the incumbents of th~se posts were brought back to their original posts after ·the ·expiry of 3 years as . provided in the rule, they contended that the Gov- ernment of India, by their d.ecision dated November .15, 1958, deleted the posts of Wireless Licence and Inspectors from the list of teniire posts and that therefore they became entitled to hold the posts without ~ny-Jimit subject to the condition that they may be transferred from one place to another according to what is calleg the rule for rotational transfers. D Rejecting the contention, E F G H HELD : The Director General of Posts and Telegraphs was competent to pa:ss the rule and it is not in any way inconsistent with the decision of the Government of India. (122 B-C] / (a) The posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors were removecj from the list of tenure posts because, they. not bein$ pernianent posts, d•d not fall within the (jefinition of 'tenure posts'. The deletion was not on account of any decision· .of the Government of India to make the appoint- ments of incumbent's of those posts permanent. [119 F-G] (b) There is no provision for constituting the posts into separate cadres. There is nothing to show that they have been sanctioned as separate units. No separate time scale has been provided for Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors, and the time-scale clerks, who were appointed to the posts, continued in the same time scale of pay of cltrks. They wer" entitled to a speci.al pay in addition to t.he time .scale pay of clerk, and thi~ show~ that they continue m the cadre of time-seal.!' clerks and were not constituted mto a separate cadre of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors.. The appointments were not transfers from one cadre to another or promotion from a lower to a higher cadre or from a lower to higher post. Though for ditectly recruited Wireless Licence Inspectors there is an avenue of promotion from these posts to those of Wireless Investigating Inspectors, there is no such· avenue for Wireless Licence Inspectors appointed from amongst time scale c'erks, their avenues of promotion being from their substantive posts of time· scale clerks. Therefore, the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors are only in the cadre of time-scale clerks carrying a special pay on.account of additional work. (120 D-E, G-121 Bl (c) The mention of these posts or the specification of their p:iy along with those of the time:scale clerks in the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Third .Amendment Rules, 1973, wouM not show that the. posts were separnte cadre posts. (121 B.C] (d) The 4irection in the decision of the Government of India to include the posts among the posts mentioned in r. 60 of Chap. 11 of the Posts and Telegraphs Manual, by amendinit the rule was not intended to confer on the incumbents the right to hold them till superannuation. [ 121 DJ 116 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1975] 2. s.c.R-. (i) Rule 60 does not speak of rotational tra.ns.fers. It only provides that posts included under the rule 'should not be_ occupied by the same officials continuously for more than the period shown against each'. It docs not also deal with the places in which an incumbent. could be rotated. The purpose of including these posts among those covered )ly r. 60 was not to affect the term of employment of the Wireless Licence lnspectors and Town Inspectors, but only to provide that they can-occupy the post& only for the period specified, namely, 3 years at a time. [121 E-F; 122 A-CJ (ii) Assuming_ the rule deals with rotational transfers and the expression 'rotational transfer' means transfer from one place to another and from one division to another, since the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors form part and parcel of the Clerical Cadrn they will be rotated only in clerical posts
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.