- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 10th April, 1987 passed by the learned Trial Judge in C. O. No. 3319 (W)of 1987. By the aforesaid order, the writ petition made by the appellants was dismissed by the learned Trial Judge. The aforesaid writ petition was moved by the appellants inter alia challenging the recommendations made by the respondent No. 1 viz. the Chairman, Standing Selection Committee (II) for filing up the vacancies for several posts mentioned in the writ petition. The appellants contended in the writ petition that the said Chairman standing Selection Committee II exceeded his jurisdiction in recommending an excess number of employees than required or notified under Circular no. 1/85 dated 28. 1. 1985 inviting applicati0ns from eligible candidates for filling up one-third of the vacancies (non-technical class III posts) through departmental test. The said appellants also contended that the said Chairman also exceeded his jurisdiction in keeping the list of the successful candidate in force for three years. It appears That the West Bengal State Electricity board adopted a policy to have 2/3rd of the vacancies in non-technical class Hi posts to be filled up by promoters from amongst the eligible candidate of the departments recommenced on seniority basis. The balance one third of such vacancies are to be failed up through departmental tests and in order to be eligible, a candidate must have specified continuous service in the relevant feeder posts of non-technical Class III post. The requirement for being qualified for the purpose of appearing in. the departmental test including the eligibility clause has been specified. In order to implement the said policy, a notice was issued for holding the examination on the 28th of January, 1985 being Circular No. 1/85 and approximate posts for which such examination was proposed to be held were also mentioned. It is the case of the appellants that some of the appellants were eligible to sit for such examination for the purpose of promotion to some of the posts and others were not eligible in the year 1985 when the circular was issued but subsequently they have also become eligible by rendering five years continuous services in the feeder posts. The appellants have contended that from the circular it will appears that such circular was intended for the purpose of selecting candidates for accelerated promotion for the one-third quota for a particular period. It was later on decided behind their back that the successful candidates in the said examination will remain in panel which will be valid for three years and not only the vacancies for which applications were invited but other vacancies subsequently occurring would be filled up from the said panel and only after the said panel is exhausted or' becomes defunct after the expiry of three years, the examination will be held for the purpose of filling up the said one-third vacancies through the selection test. The appellants have contended that such decision to fill up the posts for which the circular was not issued and to keep the said list of successful candidates in the panel valid for three years were wholly illegal and unauthorised and on that score, the decisions taken 'to keep the said panel valid for the three years and also the decision taken in giving promotion to' persons from such panel in the vacancies arising in the mean time must be held to be illegal. The learned Trial Judge has not however allowed the said writ petition and the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants.
(2.) MR. Dasgupta, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants has contended that the appellants and or the other employees of the West Bengal state Electricity Board may not have any absolute right to get any promotion but when a policy has been adopted by the Board to give accelerated promotion to one-third posts in the non-technical cadre on the basis of selection tests, the eligible candidates have a right to appear in such selection test, and to get a reasonable chance of being selected on the basis of the results made in the said examination. It has been contended by Mr. Dasgupta that when the Circular was issued in January, 1985 the approximate posts for which such examination was intended to be taken or invited was mentioned. The number of vacancies mentioned in the notice or circular clearly indicates that the same was for the vacancy for one V, ear By using the expression "approximate" against the number mentioned in the circular it cannot be reasonably contended that the vacancies will include future vacancies which may arise within a span of two or three years thereafter. The eligible candidates were never informed by any appropriate authority that the examination for selection for one third post will not be held every year but on the basis of results in the said examination, the panel will be prepared for three years and all vacancies then prepared for three years will arise within a span of next two years will also be filled up from the said panel which will remain valid for 3 years. If such intimation is not given to the employees but an examination is proposed to be held for the purpose of filing up the vacancies then arising by mentioning the number of posts in the circular, it was not permissible on the part of the authority to change the decision at a later stage and to prepare a panel for three years and to fill up not only the vacancies for which notification was issued, but subsequent vacancies arising thereafter from the said panel. It appears from the affidavit-in-opposition that as it was felt by the Director of Personnel that the annual examination or frequent examinations were impracticable and such examination should be held after a lapse of two or three years, a recommendation was made by the Director of Personnel that on the basis of results made in the selection test, a panel should be prepared for three years and the vacancies which will occur at the time of examination and also the vacancies which will subsequently arise should be filled up from the panel to be kept valid for three years. Such recommendation appeared reasonable to the Chairman of the West Bengal State Electricity Board and he had accepted the same and on such basis the Chairman of the Selection Committee recommended the names not only for the posts initially notified but also for the posts which became vacant subsequently and as a matter of fact, promotions have been given to such posts on the basis of the names included in the said panel.
(3.) MR. Arun Prokas Sircar, learned Counsel for the Respondents has submitted, that the decision taken by the Chairman of the Board is only reasonable and at the time when the examination was held, some of the writ petitioners then eligible did, not choose to appear and others were not even eligible to appear at the examination. On the basis of the result of the examination, such posts have been filled up and as such no exception should be taken against the decision of the concerned authority. Mr. Sarkar, learned Counsel has also submitted that the persons who have been given promotion in the said one-third quota in the non-technical cadre on the basis of their results in the selection test, are also not parties to the writ proceeding and no decision should be made adversely affecting them without giving them an opportunity of being heard.;