Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1606 (MAD)

K. A. Ayyanathan v. Deputy General Manager

2014-06-20

S.RAJESWARAN

body2014
Judgment : 1. The petitioner joined service in the Southern Regional Office of the National Insurance Company on 1.7.1985. He has been in continuous service for more than 27 years. Later he was promoted as Assistant on 30.6.1997. The respondents took into consideration the first degree obtained through non formal/distance education in B.A. (History) from Madras University in the year 1995 and accorded promotion. The petitioner completed the Master Degree in Sociology from Annamalai University in the year 2000. He had also pursued M.B.A. at Annamalai University with first class in the year 2008. Thus the petitioner is eligible to be promoted to the post of Senior Assistant. When applications were invited from eligible employees for promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistant, the petitioner applied for the year 2009-2010 and the petitioner was found eligible and his name was found in the considered employees list dated 7.7.2009 and 8.7.2010 respectively published by the second respondent. In the next year in 2011, the petitioner was shocked to find his name removed from the considered employees list. By the impugned order dated 6.7.2012 issued by the fourth respondent, the petitioner’s name was removed from the list, as he was found not qualified. It is their case that he had not completed Higher Secondary Course (+2). When the department had recognized the degree as a qualification for promotion to the cadre of Assistant, there is no reason for them not to consider the same for promotion to the next cadre i.e., Senior Assistant. In fact, the petitioner was offered the first degree 3 years course only after the petitioner had passed the entrance test conducted by the University which was offering that course. Additionally, the petitioner has also completed a post graduation in M.A. Sociology and the technical qualification of MBA obtained from Annamalai University in the year 2008. Therefore, non consideration of the petitioner’s case for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant was wholly illegal. Hence, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition before this Court with the abovesaid prayer. 2. The respondents 1, 2 and 4 have filed a counter affidavit wherein it is contended that according to the codified promotion policy, notification of vacancies every year will be made and candidates who are eligible would apply and marks will be allotted and the same would be computed later. 2. The respondents 1, 2 and 4 have filed a counter affidavit wherein it is contended that according to the codified promotion policy, notification of vacancies every year will be made and candidates who are eligible would apply and marks will be allotted and the same would be computed later. For the promotion of employees from the cadre of Assistants to Senior Assistants, the employees in feeder category who have served for 7 years without qualification or served minimum 5 years with specific qualification or technical qualification, the marks would be allotted. For example, for seniority 40%, for technical qualification (MBA/CA) 15%, for academic qualification 15%, for work related to performance appraisal 30%, totaling to 100%. The petitioner was one of the candidates who was eligible for inclusion in the zone of consideration for promotion for the notified post of Senior Assistants in the years 2009 and 2010 and in the year 2011, 8 vacancies of Senior Assistants were notified. There were 111 applications received by the respondents, including that of the petitioner. As per the policy, 40 applicants (in the ratio of 1:5) were eligible to stake the claim for promotion of Senior Assistants. On assessment of applicants' seniority and qualification, the marks were allotted and computation was made. The cut of mark for the year 2011 was 53 marks, and 43 candidates were found eligible in the zone of consideration as 3 of them had secured the very same marks. Out of those 43 candidates, 8 candidates were eligible for promotion and all of them had obtained more than 29 marks for their work record performance. 3. According to the petitioner though he had not done 12 years schooling, he had taken an entrance test before admission to the graduation course in the University of Madras and therefore he was entitled to get full marks of 15 for his post graduation qualification and together with technical qualification as he has obtained viz., MBA another 15 marks will be added. But according to the respondents, as he was awarded only 35 marks, adding seniority 30% and for academic 5%, he was not even eligible in the zone of consideration. According to the respondents, if the petitioner’s graduate and post graduate qualification have been taken, he would have secured 58 marks in which event, he would have entered the zone of consideration. According to the respondents, if the petitioner’s graduate and post graduate qualification have been taken, he would have secured 58 marks in which event, he would have entered the zone of consideration. According to respondents, even if the petitioner was allotted maximum marks of 30 for his work record performance, the petitioner would have secured only 88 marks. In any event, he would not have been placed on top 8 of the final merit list, as all of them had secured more than 89 marks. Therefore, the respondents would submit that the petitioner would not have been prejudiced in any manner for not having considered for promotion and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondents. I have also gone through the counter affidavit filed by the respondents. 5. In short, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the post graduate marks and the technical education MBA marks obtained by the petitioner had been considered properly, he would have got 60 marks, in which case, he would have got his promotion. When a similar issue came up for consideration earlier before this Court, a learned Single Judge, in its common judgment dated 21.4.2014 made in W.P.No.13054 of 2010, etc., after following two Division Bench judgments and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, observed that, it is not only the degree awarded by Open University to the candidates, who passed +2 examination, is valid one, but also the degree awarded to persons, who did not pass +2 examination, but, were admitted to the Degree Course after passing the entrance examination conducted by the University, is also a valid one as per the Regulation Clause 1 of Regulation 2 of 1985 of UGC Regulations. In this case, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner completed the post graduation after passing the entrance examination conducted by the University. Besides that he had also obtained technical qualification viz., MBA from the said University thereby 15 marks have to be added to the marks granted to the petitioner. 6. Therefore, in the light of the above facts and the law, the petitioner made himself eligible to be considered for the next promotion to the post of Senior Assistant from the post of Assistant. 6. Therefore, in the light of the above facts and the law, the petitioner made himself eligible to be considered for the next promotion to the post of Senior Assistant from the post of Assistant. The non consideration of the petitioner is illegal and liable to be interfered with by this Court. In the counter affidavit, the respondents would state even if the petitioner was given 15 marks as claimed by him, still he would not have been eligible for promotion. But I find that they took into consideration only 15 marks to the post graduation and not taken into account the another 15 marks, which was eligible to be added for the technical education viz., MBA qualifications. Hence, the petitioner made out a case for interference with the impugned order passed by the respondents. Thus, I am to hold that the impugned order is illegal and it is set aside. 7. In the light of the impugned order having been set aside by this Court, it is open to the petitioner to apply in future in the event of any vacancy arises for the post of Senior Assistant and on such application being made for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant by the petitioner, the respondents herein shall consider the same, taking note of the orders passed by this Court. The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. No costs.