UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus G. RAJANNA & ORS.

Citation: [2008] 15 S.C.R. 293 · Decided: 15-10-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[20C8] 15 S.C.R. 293 
,., 
-· f 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 
'A 
v. 
G. RAJANNA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 6590-6592 of 2008) 
OCTOBER 15, 2008 
B 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, C.K. THAKKER AND 
~ .#'• 
D.K. JAIN, JJ.] 
' 
Service Law: 
c 
Career advancement -
Promotion under -
Claim by 
Malis - Rejected by Central Administrative Tribunal on the 
ground that the incumbents did not possess the requisite 
qualification for the higher post - Allowed by the High Court 
- HELD: The observation of the Tribunal to the effect that the 
<! 
employees cannot claim scale of Lower Division Clerks by o· 
;. 
i 
way of in situ promotion runs contrary to the stand taken by 
Union of India all through -
The High Court has correctly 
analysed the office Memorandum, and also rightly noted thfif 
object of office Memorandum related to non-functional posts E 
and fixation of pay scales, is to see that Group 'C' and Group 
'O' employees are not allowed to stagnate in the same cadre 
-
Judgment of the High Court is based on a correct 
interpretation of the relevant clause of the office 
Memorandum and no interference is called for- Government 
of India Office Memorandum dated 13.9.1991 as modified 
c 
\ 
by Office Memorandum dated 6.11.1991 - Clauses 2(c) and 
2m. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal 
Nos.6590-6592 of 2008. 
G 
_J' 
From the final Judgment and Order dated 14.12.2004 of 
the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Petitions Nos. 
30501-30503 bf 2000. 
293 
H 
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. G. RAJANNA & ORS. 
295 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] 
• 
cannot claim the scale of Lower Division Clerk by way of in-
A 
situ promotion. Therefore, the prayer made for relief was 
rejected by the CAT. The respondents-employees moved the 
Karnataka High Court in Writ Petition Nos. 30501-30503 of 
2000. The High·Court accepted the stand of the employees and 
· observed as under :-
B 
"No doubt, the CAT has adverted to the facts pleaded in 
the original applications of the petitioners with reference to the 
~· 
statement of counter filed by the respondents. The CAT has 
i 
proceeded to examine the claim of these petitioners with c 
reference to the prescriptions 0f the qualification under the 
Cadre and Recruitment Rules for fixation of the higher pay 
scales to their posts irrespective of the fact as to whether it is 
a functional or non-functional. The object of the office 
Memorandum referred to supra with non-functional posts, 
fixation of pay-scales is to see the Group 'C' and 'D' employees 
D 
in the offices of the respondents shall not be allowed to stagnate 
' 
in the same cadre and therefore, certain monetary benefits are 
~ 
fixed by the respondents as provided at paragraph 20 of the 
office Memorandum produced at Annexure 'C'. Non 
consideration of this important aspect of the matter and 
E 
rejection of the claim of the petitioners by the CAT solely on this 
ground that they do not possess the qualification of Matriculation 
as per C & R Rules has rendered the. impugned order 
erroneous in law." 
Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the 
F 
appellants submitted that the High Court misconstrued the 
scope and ambit of Clause 2(c) and 2(f) of the office 
Memorandum. Learned counsel for the employees supported 
the judgment of the High Court. 
G 
It is to be noted that the Tribunal's conclusion is b·ased on 
a reading of Clause 2(c) and 2(f) of the office Memorandum 
~ 
dated 13th September, 1991 as modified subsequently by 
offi~e ~emorandum dated 6th November, 1991. Clause 2 of 
the office Memorandum dated 6th November. 1991 reads as 
H 
296 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 15 S.C.R. 
A 
under:-
• 
"It is clarified that in terms of para 2(a) of O.M. dated 
13.9.1991, in situ promotion is to be allowed only to the next 
' 
higher scale available in the line of promotion if the requisite 
B conditions are fulfilled. In other words, subject to the satisfaction 
of the conditions prescribed in the said O.M. Group 'D' 
employees in the scale of Rs. 750-940 will normally be 
considered for in situ promotion to the next higher seal~ of 
Rs. 775-1025 as that is the next available scale in most of the 
·~ 
organisations. So is the Cpse for promotion of employees in 
j 
c the scale of Rs.800-1150 are to be promoted to the scale of 
Rs.825-1200. However if in any particular organisation 
promotions of Group 'D' employees are required to be made. 
in a higher scale instead of scale indicated here, in accordance 
D 
with the Rules of Recruit

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