- (1.) In these two connected petitions bearing C.W.P. Nos. 15151 of 1992 R.C. Tandon and others v. State of Punjab and another, 1994 3 SCT 224 and C.W.P. No. 3105 of 1987 (Kuldip Rai Ahluwalia and others v. The Punjab State and others), the order dated 23.4.1992 Annexure P-4 has been challenged. The order in terms relates to the grant of 14% quota to the employees possessing the qualification of A.M.I.E. Consequential order dated 27.4.1992 Annexure P-5 issued by the State Punjab addressed to the Chief Engineer (Canal), Irrigation Works, Punjab asking the latter to send the names of 40 eligible employees possessing the qualification of A.M.I.E. has also been challenged.
(2.) The facts, as extracted from the C.W.P. No. 15151 of 1992, reveal that the petitioners were appointed as Junior Engineers on the dates mentioned in para 2 the petition. Their next avenue of promotion is to the post of S.D.O. They are governed by the rules known as 'The Punjab Service of Engineers Class-II (Public Works Department, Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1941'. Rules 3, 4 and 5 of the aforesaid rules provide the method of recruitment and promotion to the higher post and inasmuch as the controversy involved in the present petition is based upon rules 3, 4 and 5 the same are thus need immediate notice : "3. No person shall be appointed to the service unless he : "(a) (i) is a British subject as defined in Section 1 of the British Nationality and Status of Alions Act, 1941 is domiciled in the Punjab or Delhi. The condition regarding a Punjab or Delhi domicile may be waived in the case of a European or Anglo-Indian candidate if it is satisfactorily proved that such candidate was born of parents habitually resident of India and not established therefore temporary purpose only; or (ii) is a person who is eligible under the provisions of Section 362 of the Government of Punjab or promotion from the Overseer Engineering Service Irrigation Branch, Punjab Provincial Draftsmen and Tracers Service Rules, Temporary Engineer, taken into the service. (c) Officers directly appointed by Government. Note :- Direct appointment means that only persons not already in pensionable service under Government are eligible for consideration under this category. 5. Appointment to the service, Govt. may make appointment to the service from the classes mentioned in Rule 4, provided that no person shall be appointed unless he possesses the qualifications specified in Rule 3, and provided further, that no temporary engineer. shall be taken into and no member of the Overseers Engineering Service unless he has been declared by the Commission on the report of the Chief Engineer to be fit for the service, is serving in the Department and has held an appointment for not less than 2 years continuously before the date of entry into the service and is not less than 26 years or more than 50 years of age on the first day of the date on which taken into the service and in of a member of the Overseer Engineering Service of D/Man Service unless he has passed both the Departmental Professional and Revenue Examination of Irrigation Branch. Provided that this rule may be relaxed by Government on the recommendations of Chief Engineers in order to admit the promotion of member of the Overseer Engineering Service, of Irrigation Branch, Punjab Irrigation Branch (Provincial D/Man and Tracers) Service of Outstanding merit, who may not possess the qualifications specified in Rule 3." It is pleaded that since the rules quoted above provide no quota to A.M.I.E., a joint seniority list of employees was circulated by the respondents. Extract copy of the said seniority list has been annexed as Annexure P-I with the petition. On 23.12.1991, the Chief Engineer (Canals), Department of Irrigation Works, Punjab (respondent No. 2) circulated a seniority list of the Junior Engineers possessing, the A.M.I.E. qualification. All the petitioners, it is further pleaded are eligible for promotion to the post of S.D.O. and being eligible, they were expecting promotion to the next higher post but to their surprise, they came across a letter dated 23.4.1992 whereby the respondents provided 14% quota to the Junior Engineers who were having A.M.I.E. qualification. In pursuance of the order/letter P-4, the Government addressed a letter to respondent No. 2 for sending a list of 40 eligible employees having A.M.I.E. qualification for the purpose of promoting them against 14% quota. As mentioned above, this letter Annexure P-5 is in consequence of letter/order Annexure P-4 which has been challenged in this petition. Before filing the present writ petition, petitioner No. 1 had made a representation on 10.7.1992 but no action was taken in the matter. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the letter Annexures P-4 and P-5 which provide for 14% quota to the A.M.I.E. qualifying Junior Engineers is contrary to the rules which provide method of recruitment as well as promotion, as no quota to the Junior Engineer holding A.M.I.E. degree has been provided under the rules.
(3.) It is also argued that providing 14% quota to those who have degree of A.M.I.E., would result into discrimination against the petitioners who are diploma-holders. Both the sets of employees are discharging the same kind of duties and for that precise reason, a joint seniority-list has also been prepared. Undue favour given to the Junior Engineers holding A.M.I.E. degree without there being any distinguishing features, is thus, stated to be discriminatory and, therefore, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.;