LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus SHRI CHETAN S. NAIK ETC.

Citation: [1999] 3 S.C.R. 1275 · Decided: 30-07-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND, M. JAGANNADHA RAO, N. SANTOSH HEGDE · Disposal: Dismissed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

' 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
v. 
SHRI CHET AN S. NAIK ETC. 
JULY 30, 1999 
[DR. A.S. ANAND, CJ., M. JAGANNADHA RAO AND 
N. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] 
Service Law : 
Indian Broadcasting (Programme) Service Rules, I999 : 
Rule 7(2)(b) Schedules IV and V-Posts at serial no. 5-/ndian 
Broadcasting (Programme) Service-Junior Time Scale posts-50% posts to 
A 
B 
c 
be filled by promotion-Held, the word 'promotion' at serial no. 5 for JTS 
posts is not to be given the same meaning as selection at serial no. 3-For 
appointment to posts in JTS at serial no. 5 no selection by assessment of D 
comparative merit is contemplated either in the Rules or in Schedule IV or 
in Schedule V. 
Words and Phrases: 
Words 'promotion' and 'selection '-lvfeaning of 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition (c) 
No. 21747of1997 Etc. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.2.97 of the Central Administrative 
E 
Tribunal, Bangalore in O.A. No. 1221of1994. 
F 
R.N. Trivedi, Additional Solicitor General, Ms. Indra Sawhney, Hemant 
Sharma, B.K. Parasad, B.V. Bairam Das and V. Balachandran for the Petitioners. 
R. Thyagarajan, Senthil Jagadessan, S.N. Bhat and Shail Kumar Dwivedi 
for the Respondent. 
G 
Intervenor-in-person for the Respondent. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Thes~ two special leave petitions have been preferred against the H 
1275 
1276 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1999] 3 S.C.R. 
A judgments of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Karriataka Bench) in O.A. 
No. 1221 of 1994 and O.A. No. 1904 of 1995 dated 25.2.1997. The Transferred 
Case relates to Writ Petition No. 8320 of 1997 (Madras High Court) wherein 
the judgment of the Full Bench of the Central Administrative tribunal (Madras 
Bench) in OA No. 960 of 1994 dated 3.6.1997 and the consequential order 
B dated 3.6.1997 are in question. The Kamataka Bench allowed that OAs following 
the decision of the Emakulam Bench in OA No. 1046of1994 and 1069of1994 
dated 9 .12.1996. It has held that the 50% quota for promotion to the post of 
Junior Time Scale (for short 'JTS') in the Indian Broadcasting (Programme) 
Service (hereinafter called the 'IBPS') has to be filled not by selection but by 
'seniority'. On the other hand the Jaipur Bench in OA No. 344 of 1995 dated 
C 31. 7 .1996 has held that the promotion to the post of JTS is to be made by 
'selection'. The Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Madras 
Bench) has accepted the view of the Jaipu~ Bench that the 50% quota by 
promotion to the posts of JTS are to be filled by 'selection' and not seniority. 
The Full Bench has not accepted the view of the Kamataka Bench and the 
Emakulam Bench. The special leave petitions from Kamataka are by the 
D Union of India while in the Transferred Case the petitioner is questioning the 
correctness of the decision of the Full Bench of the Tribunal (Madras Bench). 
Rule 7(2)(a) of the IBPS rules, 1990 prescribes that 50% of JTS posts 
are to be filled by direct recruitment and Rule 7(2)(b) clearly states that the 
E remaining 50% shall be filled by 'promotion', as specified in Schedule IV and 
Schedule V. Rule 7(3) again says that notwithstanding anything in rule 7(2), 
all vacancies in JTS shall be filled by promotion for a period of 2 years from 
the date of commencement of the Rules (from 5.11.1990). By amendment dated 
7 .4.1994, the period is amended as 4 years from the date of commencement 
of the principal Rule. Schedule IV and Schedule V respectively deal with posts 
F in the Programme Management and Programme Production wings. I~ each 
wing we have the JTS posts at serial No. 5 and certain other higher posts at 
serial No. 1 to 4. We shall refer to the posts at serial No. 3, 4, 5 in these two 
wings i.e. Schedule IV and V for the present purpose. In regard to lhe higher 
posts at serial No. 3 in Schedule IV as well as ~chedule V, i.e. the management 
G and Programme wing posts in JTS - the recruitment is by 'selection'. In regard 
to the posts at serial No. 4, below serial No. 3, it is by 'promotion-cum-fitness' 
and in regard to JTS posts in question at serial No. 5, i.e. below serial No. 
4, the recruitment is 50% by direct recruitment and remaining 50% by 
promotion. 
H 
On a plain interpretation of the word 'promotion' occurring in rul.e-q(2) 
' 
U.0.1. v. C.S. NAIK 
1277 
in regard to 50% and the words 'promotion' at serial no. 3, 4 and 5 of Schedule A 
IV and Schedule V, it is clear that for the 50% JTS posts at serial No. 5, the 
appointment is by

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.