R. K. SINHA AND ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: [1991] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 524

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: L.M. SHARMA, J.S. VERMA, S.C. AGRAWAL

Case summary

J as LSGTMs straight from the post of ATMs would not involve assumption of duties or responsibilities of greater importance and that on upgradation of the eligible ATMs·to the posts of LSGTMs, the incumbents may be given an \ ( ....

Judgment text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S. C. AGRAWAL, J. In the Posts & Telegraphs Department of . the Goverment of India, there were earlier two cadres: (i) Telegraphists in the pay scale of Rs. 110-240, and (ii) Telegraph Masters (for short 'TMs') in the pay scale ofRs. 210-380. There were certain posts known as 'allowanced posts' of Assistant Telegraph Masters (ATMs), Testing Telegraphists (TILs) and Teleprinter Supervisors (TPSs). Appointments to these allowanced posts were made from amongst Telegraphists on the basis of selection through a departmental examination and the selected candidates were required to undergo a ' ·' training for a period of two months. They were paid an allowance (special pay) of Rs. 30 per month. In 1968 as a result of reorganisation, 75% of the allowanced posts ofTILs, TPSs and ATMs were merged into the post ofATM and the remaining 25% posts were abolished.

Selection/appointment for the post of ATM was thereafter made on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness from amongst Telegraphists who wanted to volunteer for such post. The requirement of training of two months was continued. The Telegraphists were entitled to extra benefits in the shape of incentives to which the ATMs were not entitled. The Third Pay Commission recommended revision of the pay scales of Telegraphists to Rs. 260-480. For TMs, the Pay Commission recommended two scales-a scale of Rs. 425-640 for Lower Scale Grade Telegraph Masters (LSGTMs) and a scale of Rs. 550-750 for Higher Scale Grade Telegraph Masters (HSGTMs).. The Pay Commission also recommended a pay scale of Rs. 380-560 for ATMs in lieu of the special pay which was given to them for the reason that the said post was not held on tenure basis and that they also relieve the TMs ofroutine supervisory duties regarding disposal of traffic.

The recommendations of the Third Pay Commission were brought into force with effect from January 1, 1973. Consequent to the aforesaid recommendations of the Third Pay Commission, the P&T Board issued the order dated August 9, 1974, whereby it was decided "that the cadre of Assistant Telegraph Masters to be borne in the pay scale of Rs. 380-560 with effect from January 1, 1973 will be treated as a new cadre for all intents and purposes". In the said order, it was also stated that the recruitment rules for this new cadre of ATMs would follow in due course. It appears that the recruitment rules were not made.

In order to improve the avenues of promotion for Telegraphist moted as LSGTMs by virtue of their seniority as Telegraphists, their promotion as LSGTMs straight for the post of ATM would not in- I volve assumption of duties or responsibilities of greater importance", it is envisaged that there would be promotion ofATMs to thatofLSGTMs straight and that the critertion for such promotion would be seniority in the gradation list ofTelegraphists as envisaged in the earlier order dated November 29, 1978 wherein it was provided that ATMs were eligible for promotion as . LSGTMs on the basis of their seniority in the gradation list ofTelegraphists. This is also clear from paragraph S of the letter dated August 17, 1983 wherein it is stated "the present pay of such ATMs who get reverted due to non-availability of LSGTM posts, may be. protected...... ~·.

This indicates that the reversion of ATMs to the posts of Telegraphists was to be done only on account of nonavailability of LSGTM posts because all the postss of ATMs were not beinP upgraded and only 85% posts were being upgraded and the balance 15% posts were being abolished. In paragraph 6 of the letter dated August 17, 1983 it is provided that the 85% upgraded posts would be over and above 20% functional ;. posts ofLSGTMs sa_nctioned as per norms laid down in letter of Director-General of P&T dated October 4, 1980 which means that the 20% posts of -r-- ~ LSGTMs which were meant for Telegraphists would not, in any way, be affected by the upgradation of 85% posis of ATMs as LSGTMs: In other words, the rights of existing Telegraphists for promotion to the the posts of LSGTMs were not adversely affected by the upgradation and the upgradation was only limited to the persons who _were holding the posts of ATMs on the date of the passing of the order dated August 17, 1983.

The Tribunal was not ·H right in talcing the view that as a result of the order dated August 17, 1983 all the ATMs were liable to be reverted to the posts ofTelegraphists and aftersuch reversion· they were to be considered for promotion to the posts of LSGTMs against 85% upgraded posts ofLSGTMs along with all the Telegraphists on the basis of their seniority in the cadre of Telegraphists. In our opinion, the selection for the purpose of appointment on the 85% ungraded posts of ATMs as . LSGTMs had to be made from amongst persons who were working as ATMs on the August 17, 1983 and the said selection was to be made on the basis of their inter se seniority as Telegraphists. In this context, it may also be mentioned that in his letter dated January 27, 1984, the Assistant Director-General (Stn.

), P&T, has clarified his instructions contained in the letter dated November 29, 1978 making ATMs eligible for promotion to the LSGTMs cadre and he has stated that seniority in the cadre ofLSGTMs promoted either directly orfrom the cadre ofATMs is fixed on the basis of their relevant seniority in the cadre of telegraphists and the question of their promotion to LSGTMs earlier or later does not have any relevance so far as their seniority is concerned. This indicates that the only effect ofthe order dated August 17, 1983 would be that ATMs who are selected for promotion as LSGTMs would be placed in the scale of LSGTMs but that would not make them senior to the Telegraphists who were senior to them but were promoted as LSGTMs subsequently because on promotion such Telegraphists would regain their seniority in the cadre of LSGTMs. The appeal is consequently allowed, the judgment and order of . the Tribunal dated February 28, 1989 in T. A. No.

1483 of 1987 is set aside and it is held that the appellants are entitled to be considered along with other ATMs for posting against the 85% upgraded posts of ATMs as LSGTMs on the basis of their inter se seniority in the cadre of Telegraphists. There will be no orders as to costs. R. P. Appeal allowed.