LexSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. versus S. K. SINGH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 797 STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS. v. S. K. SINGH & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 10194 of 2013) OCTOBER 14, 2019 [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.] Service Law - Accelerated promotion on the basis of higher educational qualifications - State of Uttaranchal (now Uttarakhand) carved out of the State of Uttar Pradesh - 200 posts advertised for appointing Junior Engineers (JEs) in the Irrigation Department - Posts filled in by both, the one having the qualification of Diploma and the other having Degree in Engineering - 2003 Rules provided for recruitment to the next higher post, Assistant Engineers (AE, Civil), 50% by promotion from the JEs and the balance 50% through direct recruitment for which the qualification was, inter alia, Degree in Engineering - In this 50% by promotion, there was further break up, i.e., 40% through the normal route, on the basis of seniority and the remaining 10% promotion quota was given through accelerated promotion in which 2.67% was meant for certain categories, while 7.33% was meant for JEs (Civil) holding Degree in Civil Engineering with 3 yrs' service, whereas normal promotion required minimum 10 yrs service - Amendment in 2004 sought to change the ratio of appointment, reducing the direct recruitment quota to 40% and increasing the promotion quota to 60% - Writ petitions filed by the Diploma-holders - Accelerated promotion quota struck down - Impugned order stayed - Held: Though equality is the very bulwark of the provisions of the Constitution, in service jurisprudence, classifications are a matter of necessity and judicial pronouncements have sought to balance the equality principle with the principle of classification, dependent on the nexus for making the classification- Higher educational qualifications have been repeatedly emphasized as an aspect which can give exclusive promotion, earlier promotion or as in this case, an accelerated promotion - Higher degree of qualification intrinsically would bring in certain skills, though undoubtedly, that should be useful and [2019] 13 S.C.R. 797 797 A B C D E F G H 798 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 13 S.C.R. have a nexus with the job being performed - Examining this nexus has been left to the wisdom of the administrative authorities, best equipped to do so as held in M. Rathinaswami's case - Bringing forth from the direct recruitment quota (for which the qualification is the Degree) to the promotion quota and giving that through accelerated promotion for such persons who have degree can hardly have any intrinsic defects which could violate Arts.14 & 16 - Historical perspective also hardly supports the private respondents as even the State of Uttar Pradesh, as it existed earlier, and the Rules as they existed then, provided for such 7.33% quota, which was never assailed by any party - Impugned judgment unsustainable and the challenge to the Rule is misplaced - Writ petition of the Diploma-holders dismissed - Constitution of India - Arts. 14, 16 - Uttaranchal Service of Engineers (Irrigation Department) (Group 'B') Rules, 2003 - Uttar Pradesh Public Works Department Assistant Engineers (Civil) Services Rules, 2003 - United Provinces Service of Engineers (Buildings and Roads Branch) Class II Rules - Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Department Civil Engineer (Subordinate) Service Regulation, 1992 -Uttar Pradesh Service of Engineers (Irrigation Department) (Group 'B') Service Rules, 1993. Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: Civil Appeal No.10194/2013 1.1 Both, for promotion and for direct appointment to AEs, Degree could be the essential qualification. Further the proposition could not be disputed that there are judicial pronouncements to support, providing for a differential in the period of service for two different sets of educational qualifications at the time of promotion. Thus, in a sense, the appellant would be within its right to provide for different periods of experience as JEs for Degree-holders and Diploma-holders, for the purposes of promotion. This is apart from the plea of the appellants that the accelerated promotion is to encourage the JEs to acquire higher qualifications, and once they acquire the higher qualification, whether they possess that qualification at the stage of entry or not would be immaterial (again a principle settled through judicial pronouncements). [Para 16] [808-C-E] A B C D E F G H 799 1.2 Though equality is the very bulwark of the provisions of the Constitution, in service jurisprudence, c
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.