IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32930 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OA.576/2006 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDNT OF POST OFFICES, KOTTAYAM DIVISION, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE SENIOR POST MASTER, KOTTAYAM HEAD POST OFFICE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NEW DELHI. BY ADV. SMT.K.GIRIJA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. M.M. RAJU, GRAMIN DAK SEVAK MAIL CARRIER, THIRUVARPU P.O.,NOW WORKING AS GROUP D, KOTTAYAM HEAD POST OFFICE. 2. K.M. HARINDRAN, FORMERLY GDSM MC KURUMULLOOR, LR GROUP D, KOTTAYAM HPO, KOTTAYAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.32930 OF 2008-S ----------------------------------------- Dated 10th November, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioners are respondents 1 to 3 in O.A.No.576/2006 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. The 1st respondent herein was the applicant and the 2nd respondent was the 4th respondent in that O.A. The applicant was a member of the scheduled caste. He is a Gramin Dak Sevak, aspiring for promotion to Group D posts available in Kottayam Division. The applicant's claim for promotion was overlooked and the 2nd respondent herein was promoted. This happened because of the insufficient number of vacancies available for promotion. The writ petitioners took the stand that the filling up of Group D posts from Gramin Dak Sevaks is direct recruitment and therefore, clearance of the screening committee, contemplated under Ext.P3 O.M was mandatory. For the year 2003, WPC 32930/08 2 the screening committee released only one vacancy, though there were four vacancies. That was the reason why the applicant could not get promotion. So, the applicant filed Ext.P1 O.A., challenging the promotion granted to the 2nd respondent herein and also praying for appropriate directions to appoint him in the Group D post. 2. The respondents 1 to 3, who are the petitioners herein, filed Ext.P2 reply statement. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, held that the appointment of Gramin Dak Sevaks to Group D posts is not direct recruitment and therefore, the stipulations in Ext.P3 O.M., regarding clearance by the screening committee were not applicable to the appointment of Gramin Dak Sevaks to Group D. In that view of the matter the Tribunal ordered to hold a review D.P.C and consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the vacancies available in the relevant year, as per Ext.P4 order. It was also ordered to grant him all consequential benefits. This Writ Petition is filed, challenging Ext.P4. 3. According to the writ petitioners, the appointment of a Gramin Dak Sevak as Group D employee cannot be treated as promotion. Reference in the Recruitment Rules regarding the D.P.C to consider the WPC 32930/08 3 case of the incumbents will not make the method of appointment as by promotion. Reliance is placed on the notes at the end of the Recruitment Rules, which is Annexure-A4, produced along with Ext.P1 O.A. The said note reads as follows: “Note: The Syllabus of the test and the minimum pass marks for recruitment to the posts at Sl.No. 1 in Part II of the Schedule relating to Subordinate Offices shall be as laid by the Department from time to time before commencement of the examination. 2. Gramin Dak Sevaks may be considered against the vacancies for direct recruitment in Subordinate Offices subject to such conditions and in such manner as may be decided by the Department from time to time. 3. Casual labourers and part time casual labourers may be considered against the vacancies for direct recruitment subject to such conditions laid down by the Department from time to time.” 4. Going by the Recruitment Rules, it is seen that in column 11 of the schedule to it, the method of recruitment is provided. There are four methods and the last among them is by direct recruitment, which has to be resorted to in the event of failure to get any candidate as per other methods. The relevant portion is quoted for easy reference: “The method of recruitment shall be in the manner specified below, namely, WPC 32930/08 4 A test shall be held to determine the working eligibility of the candidates holding the post specified against Sl. 2 for filling up the posts. In case the suitable candidates are not found to fill up the posts by such test, the remaining posts shall be filled up by the method as specified below: (i) 75% of the vacancies remaining unfilled after recruitment from employees mentioned at Sl.2 shall be filled by Gramin Dak Sevaks of the recruiting Dn or Unit where such vacancies occur, failing which by Gramin Dak Sevaks of the neighbouring Dn or Unit by selection-cum- seniority. (ii) 25% of the vacancies remaining unfilled after recruitment of employees mentioned at Sl.No.2, such vacancies shall be filled up by selection-cum-seniority in the following order: (a) by casual labourers with temporary status of the recruiting Dn or Unit, failing which, (b) by full-time casual labourers of the recruiting Dn or Unit, failing which, (c) by full-time casual labourers of the neighbouring Dn or Unit, failing which, (d) by part-time casual labourers of the recruiting Dn or Unit, failing which, (iii) by direct recruitment. Explanation:-- 1. For Postal Dn or Unit, the neighbouring Dn or Unit, as the case may be, shall be the Railway Mail Service Sub Dn and vice-versa. 2. The aforementioned test shall be governed by the WPC 32930/08 5 instructions issued by the Central Government from time to time.” 5. Going by the above, it is more than clear that the first three methods mentioned above are not treated as direct recruitment by the rule making authority. The “Note” at the end of the Recruitment Rules, which we have already quoted above, is only an enabling provision, providing for considering Gramin Dak Sevaks also for direct recruitment. It does not have any meaning as canvassed by the writ petitioners. Therefore, the said contention fails. Going by the order of the CAT, we are of the view that certainly a plausible view has been taken by the Tribunal, interpreting the Rules. We also notice that such view taken earlier has been upheld by this Court also, on more than one occasion. The learned counsel for the petitioners tried to canvass that those decisions are sub-silentio for not having considered the note at the end of the Recruitment Rules. But, we have considered the note in the Recruitment Rules and found that it has no impact on the conclusion of the Tribunal. WPC 32930/08 6 In the result, the Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. Nm/