M.Y.EQBAL,J. - (1.) IN this writ application, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ directing the respondents to absorb the petitioners on the post of Junior Engineers considering the fact that the petitioners while in service in the lower grade have obtained Diploma in Engineering and thereby became entitled for absorption under Bihar State Electricity Board Junior Electrical Engineers (General) Cadre Rules.
(2.) THE fact of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioners were initially appointed in Class III post and during service they obtained Diploma in Engineering in the year 1996 after taking due permission from the authorities. The petitioners' case is that the respondent -Bihar State Electricity Board had adopted a special procedure whereby it allowed its Class HI employees like technician, switch board operator, line - man, etc. to take permission to the Department for the purpose of higher education of Diploma in Electrical Engineering and upon passing the examination they shall be absorbed against 25% post of the total vacancies of Junior Engineers in the said Bihar State Electricity Board. It is stated that in 1982 large number of Diploma holders were absorbed in the post of Junior Engineers and they are working on the said post. In 1988, a notification was issued by the Board amending the Rules to the extent that appointment to the post of Junior Electrical Engineers from amongs't the employees of the Board having Diploma in Electrical Engineering will be made on the basis of recommendation of the Selection Com -mittee, which will be constituted by the Chairman and the said Committee will examine the record and interview of the candidates, who obtained Diploma in Electrical Engineering. It is stated that in 1997, the petitioners made representation before the Chairman of the Board for their absorption on the post of Junior Engineer and the General Manager of the concerned area Electricity Board and Thermal Power Station were asked to recommend the names of such workmen of the Board, who obtained Diploma in Electrical/Mechanical Engineering while in service of the Board. Accordingly, the names of the petitioners were included in the panel for absorption forwarded by the concerned General Manager but till date on action has been taken by the Board to absorb the petitioners on the post of Junior Engineers. 3. A counter -affidavit has been filed by the Board stating, inter alia, that previously recruitment on the post of Junior Engineers was made in the ratio of 75% -25%, i.e., 75% of the post from open advertisement and 25% post through internal candidates. Now, the Rule has been amended and the ratio has been changed from 75% -25% to 95% -5%. This amendment has been made by notification, dated 29.6.1999. It is further stated that since 1993, the Board had adopted a procedure to make selection through written test and in the same year the Board advertised 26 posts of Junior Engineers fallen vacant under 25% quota. The written test was held in 1998 and the candidates were selected on the basis of written test. Again, vide Board's Employment Notice No. 2/2000, the post of Junior Engineers has been advertised for internal recruitment and applications have been invited from such eligible candidates of the Board, who possess the requisite qualification. The respondents' case is that the petitioners have never been debarred from applying to the post of Junior Engineers and if they have applied in pursuance of the Board's advertisement, they will also be given equal opportunity like the other candidates.
(3.) MR . A.K. Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, mainly contended that once the names of the petitioners were recommended for absorption, they became entitled for the said post notwithstanding the amendment made in the Rules reducing the quota from 25% to 5%. According to the learned counsel, petitioners are entitled to be absorbed against 25% of the total vacant posts of Junior Engineers available in the Bihar Static Electricity Board. In this connection, learned counsel drawn my attention to a decision of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1627/92, a copy of which has been annexed with the reply to the counter -affidavit. Learned counsel also relied upon the decision of the apex Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. R. Dayal, reported in 1997 (10) SCC 419.;