B.C.RAY - (1.) THIS appeal by special leave is against the order made on 7-8-1986 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi holding that the order dated 10- 12-1986 extending the appointment of respondent No. 2, Shri Suresh Mathur as the Director General of All India Radio is invalid.
(2.) THE post of Director General, All India Radio is the highest post in the organisation carrying with it administrative responsibilities and also requiring from the incumbent holding the post, leadership qualities of a high order. Rules were framed for recruitment to the said post as well as to the equivalent post of Director General of Doordarshan under proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution and these rules are known as All India Radio (Recruitment of Director General. All India Radio) Rules 1963. THEse rules provide that the post of Director General, All India Radio may be filled up either by promotion or by reemployment on transfer on deputation or by direct recruitment. THEse rules also provide that 50 per cent of the vacancies are to be filled up by promotion failing which by transfer on deputation and failing both by direct recruitment and 50 per cent by reemployment or transfer on deputation or direct recruitment. It was also provided that in respect of the second category the exact method of recruitment is to be decided upon in consultation with the Union Public Service Commission on each occasion. THE post of Director General, All India Radio fell vacant on 14/02/1985. In accordance with the aforesaid recruitment rules the Additional Director General in the All India Radio who had also served for three years in the post of Additional Director General will be considered for promotion to the post of Director General. THE respondent No. 1 Shri A.R. Shinde who was appointed as Additional Director General on 24-8-1982 did not acquire the requisite qualification for being considered for promotion to the post of Director General, All India Radio as he had not rendered three years service in the said grade of Additional Director General on the said date. THE authorities concerned took recourse to make the appointment to the post by transfer on deputation. Accordingly on 4/03/1985 the respondent No. 2, Shri Suresh Mathur who was an officer of the rank of Additional Secretary to the Government of India and was the Secretary, U.P.S.C. at that time was appointed by transfer on deputation initially for a period of six months. Before the expiry of the said period of six months i.e. in July August, 1985, the authorities concerned considered the proposals for continued appointment of Shri Suresh Mathur for a further period of two years. After approval by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet the further continuation of respondent No. 2 as Director General, All India Radio till 3/03/1987 was notified on 10/12/1985 on the basis of the said proposal. This order of continuation of respondent No. 2 as Director General, All India Radio was. assailed by respondent No. 1 Shri A.R. Shinde, the Additional Director General, before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi on the ground inter alia that though he fulfilled all the requisite qualifications as provided in the said rules for being considered for promotion to the post of Director General, All India Radio, his case was not considered and the said order was made continuing the appointment of respondent No. 2 as Director General of All India Radio up to 3/03/1987. The Central Administrative Tribunal after hearing the parties quashed the appointment of respondent No. 2 and directed for filling up the post of Director General, All India Radio in accordance with the rules and to consider the case of the applicant holding that the appointment of respondent No. 2 was not made in accordance with the said rules and respondent No. 1 though fulfilled the eligibility qualification was not at all considered and that the respondent No. 2 also had not the requisite qualification as specified in the said rules for being appointed to the said post. The learned counsel for the appellant has challenged validity of the findings, recorded by the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) on both the points, viz. :- (1) As regards the finding that the appointment of respondent No. 2 was bad on the ground that it was not in accordance with the rules; and (2) that respondent No. 2 was not qualified to be appointed to the post.
(3.) HAVING given our anxious consideration to the submissions urged on behalf of both the sides and having accorded due weightage to the views expressed by the Tribunal, we are of the opinion that the findings recorded by the Tribunal on both the points are not sustainable. In so far as the validity of the appointment of respondent No. 2 is concerned, the Tribunal has overlooked the crucial circumstance that what was being done was extension of the original appointment to the post and not a regular appointment under the Rules. The relevant provisions in the background of which the question calls for consideration may be set out for the sake of convenience. Column 10 of the Schedule of Rules as amended in 1985 which provide the method of recruitment and percentage of the vacancies to be filled by various method in respect of the two posts specified in Column 2, reads as under :- "(i) 50 Per Cent by promotion failing which by transfer on deputation and failing both by direct recruitment. (ii) 50 Per Cent by re-employment or transfer on deputation or direct recruitment, the exact method of recruitment to be decided in consultation with the. Union Public Service Commission on each occasion." ;