BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Vs. R SANTHAKUMARI VELUSAMY
LAWS(SC)-2011-9-74
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: GUJARAT)
Decided on September 06,2011

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Appellant
VERSUS
R. SANTHAKUMARI VELUSAMY Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

N.G. PRABHU VS. CHIEF JUSTICE,KERALA HIGH COURT [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. V. K. SIROTHIA [REFERRED TO]
LALI TMOHAN DEB VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
TARSEM SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S S RANADE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. FATEH CHAND SONI [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRASAD VS. D K VIJAY [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA NON SC ST EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION RAILWAY VS. V K AGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. PUSPA RANI [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

AJAY KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA & ANR VS. UOI & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2019-1-286] [REFERRED TO]
AMINUL ISLAM KHAN VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA [LAWS(CAL)-2020-9-24] [REFERRED TO]
K. MEGANATHAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2014-1-102] [REFERRED TO]
RAMA NAND VS. CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(SC)-2020-8-3] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. H.JOHN NEPOMISSION [LAWS(MAD)-2019-6-419] [REFERRED TO]
SYED HAIDER M. RIZVI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2014-7-112] [REFERRED TO]
VASANT KHELA SARAK VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2019-9-126] [REFERRED TO]
KOTHARI BISWAJIT MEKAP VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2023-12-37] [REFERRED TO]
ER ATOVI KIBA VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2016-4-72] [REFERRED]
B.THIRUMAL VS. ANANDA SIVAKUMAR [LAWS(SC)-2013-11-27] [REFERRED TO]
R.K. RAVINDRAN AND ORS. VS. THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-2-450] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. VS. ASHWATHANARAYANA K.L. AND ORS. [LAWS(KAR)-2016-3-10] [REFERRED TO]
DARTHANGVUNGA VS. STATE OF MIZORAM [LAWS(GAU)-2021-2-24] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HASMUKHBHAI JIVABHAI PATEL [LAWS(GJH)-2017-12-340] [REFERRED TO]
PRATIBHA PRASHAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2016-5-72] [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATION OF SUB-ORDINATE SERVICE OF ENGINEERS MAHARASHTRA STATE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2019-2-31] [REFERRED TO]
AWDHESH KUMAR MISHRA VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SC)-2014-12-47] [REFERRED TO]
S.L.TANK VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2013-9-8] [REFERRED TO]
JASWANT SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(P&H)-2014-7-779] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. REGISTRAR [LAWS(MAD)-2015-3-670] [REFERRED]
V. VINCENT VELANKANNI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2024-9-78] [REFERRED TO]
NARINDER SINGH CHAUHAN VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2022-8-61] [REFERRED TO]
M. MOANUNGBA JAMIR AND 15 ORS. VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2020-2-108] [REFERRED TO]
D. SELVAN CHRISTOPHER SENIOR PERSONAL CLERK PUBLIC DEPARTMENT AND ORS. VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2020-10-415] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-2014-3-104] [REFERRED TO]
S L TANK AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2013-9-805] [REFERRED]
N.M. RAUT VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2020-4-4] [REFERRED TO]
KEWEPE KAPFO VS. SPEAKER, NLA [LAWS(GAU)-2022-5-81] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESHBHAI CHHAGANBHAI CHOKHALIYA & 3 VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE GUJARAT POLICE DEPARTMENT & 2 [LAWS(GJH)-2016-9-27] [REFERRED]
ENGINEERING DIPLOMA ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU; CHIEF ENGINEER [LAWS(MAD)-2015-2-44] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ODISHA & ORS VS. SATYA NARAYAN BEHURA [LAWS(SC)-2020-2-90] [REFERRED TO]
VIKRAM SINGH RAJPUT & ORS VS. M P STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2013-12-159] [REFERRED]
IBRAHIMKUTTY K. VS. CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC [LAWS(KER)-2015-1-175] [REFERRED TO]
MEGRAJ GURUNG VS. STATE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY SECRETARIAT [LAWS(SIK)-2022-6-9] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. PUNDLIK DADAJI PIPARE [LAWS(BOM)-2022-8-112] [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA PRATAP SINGH VS. U.P. POWER CORPORATION LTD. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-4] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

R.V. Raveendran, J. - (1.)The Appellant, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., is the successor of the Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications, and Government of India (for short government or telecom department). The question involved in these matters is whether rules of reservation will apply to upgradation of posts.
(2.)There were four grades of employees of telecom departments known as Telegraphists or Telecom Operating Assistants in the Telecom Department. Promotions from one grade to a higher grade were on the basis of seniority/departmental examination. The telecom department introduced an One Time-Bound Promotion scheme (OTBP scheme for short) in the year 1983-84 under which regular employees who had completed 16 years of service in a grade, were placed in the next higher grade. After some years, the employees unions demanded a second time-bound promotion on completion of 26 years of service in the basic grade, as Group C and Group D cadres were only entitled to one-time bound promotion. The government decided that a second time bound promotion was not feasible. However, to provide relief from stagnation in the grade, the government decided to have a Biennial Cadre Review (BCR for short) under which a specified percentage of posts could be upgraded on the basis of functional justification.
(3.)The BCR scheme was accordingly introduced vide Circular dated 16.10.1990. It was made applicable to those cadres in Group C and Group D, for which one-time bound promotion scheme on completion of 16 years of service in the basic grade was in force. Under the said scheme, employees who were in regular service as on 1.1.1990 and had completed 26 years of satisfactory service in the basic cadres, were to be screened by a duly constituted Committee to assess their performance and determine their suitability for advancement and if they were found suitable, to be upgraded in the higher scale. The upgradation was restricted to 10% of the posts in Grade III. We extract below the relevant terms of the BCR from the Circular dated 16.10.1990:
....

(iii) Biennial Cadre Reviews will be conducted in respect of the eligible cadre at the level of circles who control these cadres.

(iv) At the time of review the number of officials who have completed/would be completing 26 years of service in the basic cadres including time spend in higher scale (OTBP) will be ascertained. The persons will be screened by the duly constituted Review committee to assess the performance and suitability for advancement.

(v) In the Biennial cadre review, suitable number of posts will be created by upgradation based on functional justification.

(vi) Creation of posts by upgradation will be in the scales indicated below:

Basic scale of the cadreScale after OTBP after 16 years of basic gradeScale after BCR on completion of 26 years or more

750-940800-1150950-1400

825-1200950-14001200-1800

975-15401320-20401400-2600

975-16001400-23001600-2660

(10% of the posts in the pay scale of 1600-2660 will be in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200

1320-20401600-26001640-2900

(10% of the posts in the pay scale of 1640-2900 will be in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200)

(vi) **********

(viii) Necessary posts will be created by upgradation under the powers of CGMs in consultation with their accredited finance.

(ix) The first Biennial Cadre Review for eligible cadres/officials may be conducted immediately covering the period upto 30.6.1992 to ascertain the eligible officials who have completed/will be completing 26 years of services or more as on the crucial dates, namely, the date of the review 01.1.1991, 01.7.1991 and 01.1.1992. The number of posts needed or provide for the promotion of the eligible persons will be determined and will be sanctioned/activated in four instalments the first immediately, the second on 01.9.1991, the third on 01.7.1991 and the fourth on 01.1.1992. With these posts, it should be possible be provide for promotion of those employees who have completed 26 years of service or more on the above crucial dates, subject to their otherwise being found fit. The criterion for promotion will be seniority, subject to selection.

Order implementing the first instalment of cadre review should be issued before 30.11.1990.

In the second cadre review, which will cover the period from 1.7.1992 to 30.6.1994, which should be completed before 01.7.1992, the required number of posts needed to be released in half yearly instalments on 1.7.1992, 1.1.1993, 1.7.1993 and 1.1.1994 to cater for promotion of those who would have completed 26 years of service on the four crucial dates, will be ascertained and sanctions released in appropriate instalment so that the promotions of eligible personnel could be notified on due dates.

....



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.