JUDGMENT 1995 (3) SCR 634 The following Order of the Court was delivered:
The petitioners working under the Directorate General of Quality Assurance and holding the post of Junior Scientific Officers, a Class-II post on the date the petition was filed, seek a direction that the amendment in the Rules which provide that Junior Scientific Officer (Promotees) in order to hold the post of Senior Scientific Officers-II should have a Master's Degree, be declared ultra vires. In the alternative it is claimed that since the petitioners were empanelled as Junior Scientific Officers Grade- II they were entitled to same benefit under the Rules framed by the Government as was extended to those promotees who were working on the post of Senior Scientific Officers Grade-II.
Relevant Rules framed by Ministry of Defence are known as Defence Quality Assurance Rules, 1979. Rule 8 of it provides that 50% of the posts of Senior Scientific Officers are to be filled by promotion on basis of selection on merit from the grade of Junior Scientific Officers. The number of posts, designation, pay and eligibility are provided by Schedule I to the Rules. The post of Senior Scientific Officer Grade II is mentioned at serial no. 6. The entry is reproduced below :
Grade from which Sl. Designation Scale of No. of promotion is permissible No. of post pay posts and the minimum eligibility period prescribed
1. 2 3 4 5
6. Senior Rs. 700-40- 200 Junior Scientific Officer Scientific 900EB-40- with 3 years' regular Officer 1100-50-130C service in the grade and Grade-II possessing degree in Engineering /Masters degree in Science or equivalent qualification. The requirement of educational qualification shall not apply to those holding the post of Junior Scientific Officer on regular basis on the date of promulgation of these rules.
A Junior Scientific Officer thus could be promoted as Senior Scientific Officer only if he had put in three years regular service and possessed a Degree in Engineering. The petitioners did not satisfy either condition. They were not working as Junior Scientific Officer on the date on which these Rules were enforced. They were only Diploma holders. What is urged on behalf of the petitioners is that the requirement of being possessed of a degree was applicable for direct appointments and not to promotees. The learned counsel vehemently urged that once a person holding diploma was selected as a Junior Scientific Officer then for purposes of promotion to the post of Senior Scientific Officer the eligibility criteria of higher qualification could not be applied to him. The learned counsel further urged that the petitioners having worked for quite long time they were entitled to be promoted on basis of their experience. And the requirement of degree should not be adhered to. The Rules came into force in September 1979. The feeder post for Senior Scientific Officer Grade. II under Schedule I to the Rules is Junior Scientific Officer. Therefore, no one could be promoted unless he satisfied the eligibility criteria as laid down in the Rules. The petitioners had no doubt been empanelled on the earlier Rules, for being promoted to the post of Junior Scientific Officers, but that did not confer any right on them to be considered for higher post. They were not Junior Scientific Officers. They had not even acquired any experience of Junior Scientific Officer. Mere entitlement to be appointed as Junior Scientific Officer did not make them a Junior Scientific Officer. Since the petitioners were not working as Junior Scientific Officers they could not be said to have undergone three years' regular service as such. Further they are only diploma holders. Neither of the eligibility criteria was satisfied. Since on the date when Rules came into force they were not even Junior Scientific Officers they cannot successfully claim to have been affected by the rule. Even the submission that the requirement of possessing a degree for being appointed to the post of Senior Scientific Officer Grade II applied only to direct appointments and not to the promotion is not made out by Schedule I to 1979 Rules. The submission of the learned counsel that this provision should be read by bifurcating into two and the requirement of three years should be taken for promotion and engineering for the direct recruitment is without any substance.
The submission of the learned counsel that the petitioners who were empanelled should be extended the same benefit as those who were working on regular basis too cannot be accepted as those who were empanelled could not be treated alike to those who were working and holding the post of Junior Scientific Officer.
In the result, this petition fails and is dismissed.
Petition dismissed.