UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus SYED MOHD. RAZA KAZMI AND ORS.

Citation: [1992] 2 S.C.R. 280 · Decided: 13-03-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RANGANATHAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
v. 
SYED MOHD. RAZA KAZMI AND ORS.' 
MARCH 13, 1992 
[S. RANGANATHAN, V. RAMASWAMI AND YOGESHWAR 
DAYAL, JJ.] 
Civil Services : 
C 
Income Tax Department--Creation of cadre of Tax Assistants-fnter-
mediary cadre between Upper Division Clerk and Head Clerk-Promotion to 
--{ 
D 
E 
the post of Head Clerk along with UDCs on the basis of seniority in the cadre 
of UDC-Claim of Tax Assistants for being declared en bloc senior to Upper ">-
Division Clerks-Validity of the claim-consideration of-Policy decisions 
regarding promotions-Intelference by Court/Tribunal-When justified. 
The Respondents joined service in the Income Tax Department as 
Upper Division Clerks. In the normal course after five years of service and 
after passing a ministerial staff examination, they would have been 
promoted as Head Clerks. Since there was stagnation, the Government 
constituted a grade of Tax Assistants, as an intermediary cadre between 
Upper Division Clerks and Head Clerks. One-third of the cadre strength 
of UDCs was upgraded as Tax Assistants. The recruitment to the post of 
Tax Assistants was entirely by promotion of UDCs, on a selection basis. 
-UDCs with a minimum service of three years who had secured atleast 40 
per cent marks in atleast four subjects in the departmental examination 
F 
for the post of Income Tax Inspectors, were considered for selection as Tax 
Assistants. 
G 
Having fulfilled the above qualifications, the Respondents were _;-
promoted as Tax Assistants. 
Even after the creation of the post of Tax Assistant, the recruitment 
rules for the post of Head Clerk remained unaltered. As such, only UDCs 
were eligible for promotion as Head Clerk; the Tax Assistants were not 
eligible. For the post of Income Tax Inspector, the Tax Assistants were 
~igible subject to their completing the departmental examination therefor. 
H Since the eligible candidates from higher ministerial cadres were con-
280 
U.O.I. v. MOHD. RAZA KAZMI 
281 
.f~ 
sidered first, the Tax Assistants bad to wait for their tum. 
A 
The department, after considering the fact that Tax Assistants 
formed a grade higher than that of UDCs, and that it would be inequitable 
to deny them promotion as Head Clerks, issued instructions to the effect 
that Tax Assistants would also be considered along with UDCs for promo· 
B 
ti on as Head Clerk. However, they were to be considered only in accordance 
..,, 
with their seniority in the cadre of UDCs, irrespective of their confirmation 
in the grade of Tax Assistants. This resulted in a peculiar situation 
wherein UDCs who could not qualify for the post of Tax Assistants could 
become Head Clerks, and the Tax Assistants, who formed a higher grade, 
~ 
were considered along with such UDCs, for promotion to the post of Head c 
Clerks. 
~ 
Being aggrieved by the said instructions, the respondents ap· 
proacbed the Central Administrative Tribunal, contending that the Tax 
Assistants should be treated en bloc as a cadre senior to UDCs, as was the 
position in regard to promotion for the post of Income Tax Inspector, and D 
that they should not be made to wait for their turn in seniority as UDC, 
for promotion to the post of Head Clerk. 
The Tribunal was of the view that the Government should evolve a 
proper scheme to tide over the situation and suggested three alternative E 
-" 
methods, viz., (i) A quota or roster on the same lines, as in the case of 
Inspectors for prorilotion to the post of Head Clerks should be fixed; (ii) 
Option should be invited from such of the TAs who want to opt for HC's 
posts and thereafter for supervis~rs, posts; and (iii) the posts of HCs 
should be filled not by seniority alone but by an open competition where 
all UDCs of certain minimur.1 years of service are allowed to compete. 
F 
1"....,.. 
The department considered the suggestions given by the Tribunal 
and felt that since the existing scheme of promotion of Tax Assistants to 
Head Clerk had stood the test of time and since it was in the best interest 
of the department and all the feeder cadres ofemployees, any change would G 
create enormous difficulties for the department whose offices are located 
all over the country. Therefore, the department decided to continue the 
existing scheme. 
~ 
The Department having stood its ground, the Respondents again 
moved the Tribunal questioning the stand of the department and certain H 
282 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1992] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
amendments to the Recruit

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