STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS. versus A.K. RAJORIYA AND ANR.

Citation: [1992] 2 S.C.R. 854 · Decided: 28-04-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS. 
v. 
A.K. RAJORIYA AND ANR. 
APRIL 28, 1992 
B 
(S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN AND P.B. SAWANT, JJ.] 
M.P. State Industries (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1985: Rule 
6(2}-Schedule II: Interpretation of. 
\ )'--
c 
Directorate of M.P. Industries-Deputy Directors-Recruitment 
of-50% by Direct recruitment and 50% by Promotion-Held Rule 6(2) read 
with Schedule II relates to maintenance of proportion between direct recruits 
--
and promotees in the total strength of cadre-It does not pertain to filling up 
r 
of vacancies whenever they occur. 
D 
Rule 6(1) of the Madhya Pradesh State Industries (Gazetted) Service 
-( 
Recruitment Rules, 1985 provides that recruitment to the service shall be 
(a) by direct recruitment (b) by promotion and (c) by transfer. Rule 6(2) 
provides that the number of persons recruited by promotion or transfer 
shall not at any time exceed the percentage shown in Schedule II of the 
E 
number of duty posts specified in Schedule I. Schedule II mentions that 
the percentage of the duty posts of Deputy Directors to be filled. in by pro-
·motion would be fifty and that to be filled by promotion would also be fifty. 
In the Directorate of Industries of Madhya Pradesh the strength of 
cadre of Deputy Directors was 57 at the relevant time. 28 posts were held 
F 
by promotees and 21 by direct recruits. To conform to the provisions of 
Rule 6(2) the Government filled the eight vacant posts of Deputy Directors 
only by direct recruitment. The Respondent-Assistant Directors challenged 
-
the said appointments contending that Rule 6(2) read with Schedule II 
requires that whenever vacancies occur in the post of Deputy Director, they 
G 
should be filled in 50% by direct recuitment and 50% by promotion from 
the Assistant Directors and since all the eight vacancies were filled in only 
--r 
by direct recruitment in violation of Rule 6(2) they were denied their legal 
right to promotion to the post of Deputy Director. On behalf of the State 
and directly recruited Deputy Directors it was contended that Rule 6(2) 
read with Schedule II requires that the strength of cadre of Deputy 
H 
Directors should at any point of time consist of not more than 50% 
854 
STATE OF M.P. v. A.K RATORIYA 
855 
~J. 
promotees and the transferred employees and since at the relevant time A 
28 incumbents were promotees and the other 21 incumbents were direct 
recruits the direct recruitment of eight Deputy Directors was in conformity 
with Rule 6(2). 
--( 
The Madhya Pradesh State Tribunal held that Rule 6(2) requires B 
that 50% of the vacancies on every occasion should be filled by direct 
recruits and promotees respectively. Therefore, four out of the eight posts 
of Deputy Directors should go to respondent-Assistant Directors for being' 
filled in by promotion. Again~~ the order of the Tribunal.appeals were filed 
---
in this Court • 
..,-
c 
,, 
~-
Allowing the appeal, this Court, 
HELD : 1. The impugned order of the Tribunal is unsustainable in ' 
law. Therefore, it is set aside. (858-E, 861-8) 
2. Although the heading of Rule 6 is 'Methods of Recruitment' and D 
sub-clause (1) of the said rule states that the recruitment to the service 
shall be (a) by direct recruitment (b) by promotion and (c) by transfer, 
the language of sub-clause (2) of the said rule is very clear. It states that 
at no time the number of Deputy Directors recruited by promotion or 
r-
transfer, shall exceed the percentage shown in Schedule II, of the number E 
of Duty Posts specified in Schedule I. Schedule II mentions that the per-
centage of the duty posts to be filled in by promotion would be fifty. Thus, 
neither Rules 6(2) nor Schedule II refers to the vacancies to be filled in. 
-
On the other hand, they speak of the percentage of direct recruits and pro· 
motees to be maintained in the posts at any point of time. (859 F~H, 860-A] 
F 
There is no ambiguity in the language either of sub-clause (2) of Rule 
"T 
6 or of Schedule II ·referred to therein. On a plain reading of both the said 
provisions, it is clear that the Rule does not pertain to the filling in of 
vacancies when they occur but to the maintenance of the proportfon 
between the direct recruits and promotees. The Rule requires that the G 
proportion between the two in the cadre or duty posts should be so 
maintained that at no time those recruited either by promotion or transfer 
). 
exceed 50% of the duty posts or cadre strength. (860 A-BJ 
Bishan Sar
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.