B.P. Singh, J. - (1.) This application for clarification has been filed by the applicants pursuant to the liberty granted to them by order of this Court dated July 18, 2003 in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 9189 of 2003 in Promotee Telecom Engineers Forum and Ors. v. Secretary, Department of Telecommunications and Ors. The applicants pray that this Court may be pleased to clarify that the observations made by this Court in its judgment and order reported in Union of India v. Madras Telephone SC & ST Social Welfare Association dated April 26, 2000 protects the seniority and consequent promotion of persons who had judgments in their favour from the Central Administrative Tribunal duly confirmed by this Court which have thus attained finality. Their seniority and promotion, therefore, cannot be disturbed in any manner whatsoever. The respondents who have revised the seniority list on 22nd, 26th and 28th March, 2001 respectively and purporting to give effect thereto issued the letter dated March 30, 2001, must recognize the finality of the judgments in favour of the applicants and restore them to their original seniority.To appreciate the controversy it is necessary to refer to the background in which this question has arisen.
(2.) The applicants are/were members of the Telegraph Engineering Service Class II. Before coming into force of the Telegraph Engineering Service Class II Recruitment Rules, 1966 framed in exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the promotion from the post of erstwhile Engineering Supervisor Telecom (re-designated as Junior Engineer) to the post of Assistant Engineer was made in accordance with the instructions contained in paragraph 206 of Post and Telegraph Manual, Vol. IV. These instructions were executive instructions which governed the field in the absence of statutory rules. In accordance with the aforesaid executive instructions contained in the Manual promotion to Class II was made according to the principle of seniority-cum-fitness. Those who passed the qualifying examination earlier ranked senior as a group to those who passed the examination on subsequent occasions, i.e. officials who passed the examination held in the year 1956 ranked en block senior to those who passed in 1957. Their seniority inter se, however, was determined according to their seniority in the cadre of Engineering Supervisors. However, with the coming into force of the Recruitment Rules, 1966 w.e.f. June 15, 1966, the method of determining seniority was changed. It was provided that the Engineering Supervisors must complete 5 years of service to be eligible for appearing at the departmental qualifying examination. The same requirement existed earlier as well, but under para (v) of Appendix 1 of Recruitment Rules, the eligibility list of candidates for consideration of the Departmental Promotion Committee was to be prepared in accordance with the instructions as may be issued by the Government from time to time. Accordingly, the Government of India, Department of Communication issued instructions dated June 28, 1966 prescribing the procedure for the preparation of eligibility list of the officers for being placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee. The instructions required the preparation of a separate list for each year of recruitment. Para (v) of the instructions provided that all officials of a particular year of recruitment/ appointment, who had qualified in the examination, would rank en- block senior to those officials of the same year of recruitment/ appointment, who qualified in subsequent examination. It would thus appear that in the matter of promotion the emphasis shifted from the year of passing the examination to the year of recruitment/ appointment of the candidate concerned.
(3.) In the year 1981 one Shri Parmanand Lal (1966 batch) and Brij Mohan (1965 batch), both of whom qualified in the qualifying examination held in 1974, filed two writ petitions complaining of their placement in the eligibility list below the last man who passed the qualifying examination in 1975. The department contended that the eligibility list had been arranged on the basis of seniority, based on the year of recruitment and ignoring the year of passing the qualifying departmental examination, as required by the Recruitment Promotion Rules of 1966. The Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court considered the submissions urged before it in the light of the Recruitment Rules of 1966 as also the Rules of 1981 and para 206 of the P & T Manual and concluded that those who qualified in the departmental examination earlier were entitled to be promoted prior to those who qualified later, irrespective of the year of their initial recruitment. It was held that para 206 of the Manual was not in conflict with either the Rules of 1966 or 1981, but was supplemental to those Rules. Relief was accordingly granted to the writ petitioners based on the interpretation of the Rules and para 206 of the P & T Manual.;