Case: P.G. Joshi &amp; Others Vs. Director General, Posts &amp; Telegraphs, New Delhi &amp; Others

strength of a service or a part of a service sanctioned as separate unit."13. There are no materials to hold that the posts of Wireless Licence Inspector and Town Inspector have been sanctioned as separate units. No separate time-scale has been provided for Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors and, the time-scale clerks who were appointed to these posts, continued in the same time-scale of pay of clerks. As already stated on appointment as Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors, they were entitled to a special pay of Rs. 30/- per month. Special pay has been defined in Fundamental Rule 9 (25) thus :"Special pay means, an addition, of the nature of pay,to the emoluments of a post or of a Government servantgranted in consideration of(a) the specially arduous nature of the duties; or(b) a specific addition to the work or responsibility, or(c) the unhealthiness of the locality in which the work is performed."14. The provision for payment of a special pay of Rs. 30/- in addition to the time-scale pay of clerks is inconsistent with the constitution of a separate cadre of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors. The provision for special pay shows that they continue in the cadre of time-scale clerks. Appointment as Wireless Licence Inspectors or Town Inspectors is not a case of transfer from one cadre to another or a case of promotion from a lower cadre to a higher cadre or from a lower post to a higher post.15. Though, for directly recruited Wireless Licence Inspectors, there is an avenue of promotion from those posts to the posts of Wireless Investigating Inspectors, no such avenue of promotion has been shown to exist for Wireless Licence Inspectors appointed from amongst time-scale clerks. Their avenues of promotion are from their substantive posts of time-scale clerks. The posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors to which time-scale clerks are appointed by selection did not constitute a separate cadre and the appointments are not by way of promotion. The posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors are in the cadre of time-scale clerks and carry a special pay on account of additional work.16. The mention of the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors or the specification of the pay of the Wireless Licence Inspectors along with those of the time scale clerks in the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Third Amendment Rules, 1973, which came into force on January 1, 1973, would not show that the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors were separate cadre posts.17. It was then contended that the decision of the Government of India was that the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors should be treated like other posts for which rotational transfers are prescribed and that, by that decision, it was directed that these posts-should be included among the posts mentioned in Rule 60 of Chapter 11 of the Posts and Telegraphs Manual, Vol. IV, by amending the rule. It was, therefore, submitted that the decision of the Government of India was clearly intended to confer on the incumbents of the posts the title to hold them till their superannuation.18. A reference to Rule 60 would make it clear that it does not speak of rotational transfers. All that the rule provides is that posts included under the rule "should not be occupied by the same officials continuously for more than the period shown against each." But, as the decision of the Government dated November 15, 1958 directs that these posts should be included under Rule 60 and since the decision is that these posts should be treated like other posts for which rotational transfers are prescribed, we will proceed on the assumption that that rule deals with rotational transfers. But what follows? The dictionary meaning of rotational is : regular and recurring; succession in office or duties. An element of rotation must be involved in rotational transfer. But what is the rotation if this submission is accepted ? It was submitted that the expression rotational transfer means transfer from one place to another place and from one division to another division, but in the same cadre. Even if the submission is accepted, it would not in any way change the position, for, as we have already seen, the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors form part and parcel of the clerical cadre and, therefore, they will be rotated only in clerical posts which are in the same cadre. Nor do we think that the expression rotational transfer means transfer from one place to another or from one division to another but in the some post.19. In our view, the expression, in the context, can only mean transfer from one post to another and, after the member has spent some time in the post to which he has been transferred, he should be brought back to the original post. This would involve an element of rotation and this is precisely what has been done in the present case, namely, that the incumbents of the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors are being brought back to their original posts after the expiry of the period, namely, 3 years. As we said, Rule 60 only says that the posts included therein should not ordinarily be occupied by the same officials continuously for more than the period shown against each. It does not deal with the places in which an incumbent could be rotated. The expression rotational transfer has nothing to do with the right of the incumbents to hold the posts permanently. The purpose of including these posts among the posts covered by Rule 60 was not to affect the term of employment of the Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors, but only to provide that they can occupy the posts only for a period specified, namely, 3 years at a time. The Director General of Posts and Telegraphs was competent to pass R. 279/4 and it is not in any way inconsistent with the decision of the Government of India dated November 15, 1958.20.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]13. There are no materials to hold that the posts of Wireless Licence Inspector and Town Inspector have been sanctioned as separate units. No separate time-scale has been provided for Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors and, the time-scale clerks who were appointed to these posts, continued in the same time-scale of pay of clerks. As already stated on appointment as Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors, they were entitled to a special pay of Rs. 30/- per month. Special pay has been defined in Fundamental Rule 9The mention of the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors or the specification of the pay of the Wireless Licence Inspectors along with those of the time scale clerks in the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Third Amendment Rules, 1973, which came into force on January 1, 1973, would not show that the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors were separate cadreour view, the expression, in the context, can only mean transfer from one post to another and, after the member has spent some time in the post to which he has been transferred, he should be brought back to the original post. This would involve an element of rotation and this is precisely what has been done in the present case, namely, that the incumbents of the posts of Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors are being brought back to their original posts after the expiry of the period, namely, 3 years. As we said, Rule 60 only says that the posts included therein should not ordinarily be occupied by the same officials continuously for more than the period shown against each. It does not deal with the places in which an incumbent could be rotated. The expression rotational transfer has nothing to do with the right of the incumbents to hold the posts permanently. The purpose of including these posts among the posts covered by Rule 60 was not to affect the term of employment of the Wireless Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors, but only to provide that they can occupy the posts only for a period specified, namely, 3 years at a time. The Director General of Posts and Telegraphs was competent to pass R. 279/4 and it is not in any way inconsistent with the decision of the Government of India dated November 15, 1958.Neither the post of Wireless Licence Inspector not that of Town Inspector answers this definition. That apart, the inclusion of these posts in the list of tenure posts created administrative difficulties. That is clear from the files and notings referred to in the judgment of the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) in Special Civil Applns. Nos. 1 and 240 of 1973 decided on 15-9-1973 = (reported in 1974 Lab IC 1135) (Bom.) It would, therefore, appear that the posts of Wire-less Licence Inspectors and Town Inspectors were removed from the list of tenure because they, not being permanent posts, did not fall within the definition of tenure posts. The deletion was not on account of any decision by the Government of India to make the appointments of the incumbents of these posts permanent. If that had been the decision, the language would have been different.