Ravinder Kumar Kapoor and Others vs State and Others

Hasnain Massodi, J.—The petition on consideration is admitted to hearing, and on consensus taken up for final disposal. Learned counsel

for applicants, seeking impleadment also joins learned counsel for parties in their prayer for final disposal of the petition.

The State Government vide Government Order No. 72-Agri of 1984 dated 1st February, 1984 accorded sanction to creation of a cadre of

Rehbar-i-Zirat with the strength of 300 personnel and their distribution as per the breakup detailed in Annexure - A to the Order. Each Rehbar-i-

Zirat was to receive a consolidated salary of Rs. 400/- per month. The Rehbar-i-Zirat, as indicated by nomenclature used, was to offer technical

support to the programs of intensive agricultural development in various parts of the State, liaise with the Department of Agriculture and

Horticulture and get involved in guiding the farmers with regard to the availability of the packages, arrangement of inputs including arrangement of

crop and other loans required for intensification of Agriculture production. The order according sanction to creation of the posts of Rehbar-i-Zirat,

was followed by Government Order No. 305-Agri of 1984 dated 25.05.1984 whereby sanctioned was accorded to the appointment of

candidates listed in annexure to the order as Rehbar-i-Zirat on a consolidated salary of Rs. 400/- per month. S/Shri Ravinder Kumar Kapoor,

A.K. Dubey and Arun Kumar Makhnotra - petitioners herein, found place in the Annexure at Serial Nos. 10, 111 and 174 and were appointed as

Rehbar-i-Zirat Aforementioned Government Order.

The State Cabinet on 16th August, 1984 took a decision to implement the National Agricultural Extension Project (Trainings and Visits

Program) in the State. In wake of the implementation of the project sanction was accorded vide Government Order No. 607-Agri of 1984 dated

18.10.1984, amongst other posts, to the creation of 1000 Village Extension Workers posts against the reduction of 300 posts of Rehbar-i-Zirat.

The 300 Agricultural Graduates appointed as Rehbar-i-Zirat, were vide Government order No. 608-Agri of 1984 dated 18.10.1984 designated

as Village Extension Workers under National Agricultural Extension Project (Trainings and Visits Program) and placed in the pay scale of Rs.

825-1240 plus usual allowance with immediate effect. The petitioners, like their colleagues, appointed as Rehbar-i-Zirat were also designated as

Village Extension Workers under National Agricultural Project (Trainings and Visits Program) and placed in the aforementioned pay scale.

The respondent No. 1 after long drawn litigation between officers of the Agricultural Production Department as regards their inter se seniority

vide Circular No. Agri-E-8(1)/2010 dated 29.10.2010 issued a tentative seniority list of Village Extension Workers as on 18.10.1984. The list

was duly circulated and any one aggrieved of his/her position in the tentative seniority list, given an opportunity to file his/her objections, if any,

within 15 days from the date the list was issued. The petitioners figured at Serial Nos. 10, 110, and 173 in the tentative seniority list. The tentative

seniority list was followed by final seniority list of the Village Extension Workers as on 18.10.1984 notified Vide Government Order No. 313-Agri

of 2010 dated 27.12.2010. The petitioners figure at Serial Nos. 9, 104 and 164 in the final seniority list.

The petitioners' case is that their seniority as Village Extension Workers is to be reckoned with effect from 20.05.1984 when they were

appointed as Rehbar-i-Zirat on a consolidated salary of Rs. 400/- per month and not with effect from 18.10.1984 when under Government Order

No. 608 - Agri of 1984 dated 18.10.1984 they were designated as Village Extension Workers under the National Agricultural Extension Project

(Trainings and Visits Program). The petitioners' case is that the Government Order No. 608 Agri of 1984 dated 18.10.1984 did not amount to

fresh appointment in favour of the petitioners and other 297 Agricultural Graduates appointed as Rehbar-i-Zirat vide Government Order No. 305

- Agri of 25th May, 1984 but only was in the nature of change in nomenclature and involved their placement in a regular pay scale instead of

consolidated salary.

The petitioners plead that the nature of duties performed by the petitioners and their colleagues, continued to remain unchanged even after their

designation as Village Extension Workers and thus their seniority in the cadre of Village Extension Workers was to be counted from 18th May,

1984. The petitioners also place reliance on the Cabinet decision taken on 18th December, 1983 whereby it was decided that all future

recruitments to the level of Agriculture Assistants and Horticulture Assistants and similar other posts, were to be made from the cadre of Rehbar-i-

Zirat and amendments to the recruitment rules wherever necessary would be effected to carryout mandate of aforementioned Cabinet decision. It

is pointed out that the petitioners and their other colleagues appointed as Rehbar-i-Zirat, were amongst more than a thousand Agricultural

graduates, who aspired for the post of Rehbar-i-Zirat appeared before Special Divisional Boards and were recommended for appointment as such

on the basis of their performance and over all merit.

It is averred that Jammu and Kashmir Agriculture (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1988 notified Vide SRO 179 of 1988 dated 2nd June,

1988 were made only to create promotional avenues for Rehbar-i-Zirat and the order No. 608-Agri of 1984 dated 18.10.1984 was a step to

make Rehbar-i-Zirat part of the feeding cadre for the post of Agriculture Assistants envisaged under 1988 Rules. The petitioners claim to have

filed their objections to the tentative seniority list of Village Extension Workers (erstwhile Rehbar-i-Zirat) as it stood on 18th October, 1984,

circulated vide circular No. Agri-E-08 (1) 2010 dated 29th October, 2010 and in their representation insisted that their seniority as Village

Extension Workers be counted with effect from the date of their initial appointment as Rehbar-i-Zirat vide order No. 305 - Agri of 1984 dated

25th May, 1984 and not with effect from 18th October, 1984 when they were merely designated as Village Extension Workers.

The respondent No. 1, according to the petitioners without taking a decision by a reasoned order on the representation made by the petitioners

and their colleagues issued the final seniority list of the Village extension Workers as it stood on 18th October, 1984 by merely stating that the

representations made by the petitioners were without any merit. It is stated that unmindful of the case projected in the representations, the

respondent No. 1 issued the final seniority list vide Government Order No. 313-Agri of 2010 dated 27.12.2010 taking the petitioners and their

colleagues/other Rehbar-i-Zirat, to have been appointed as Village Extension Workers on 18.10.1984.

The petitioners while questioning the final Seniority list on the aforesaid grounds point out that the final seniority list has a direct bearing on the

promotional avenues of the petitioners inasmuch as 50 % of the posts of Agriculture Assistants in terms of Jammu and Kashmir Agriculture

(Gazetted) Service constituted under Jammu and Kashmir (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1988 are to be filled up from the cadre of Village

Extension Workers with graduate degree in Agriculture and having four years experience as Village Extension Workers. It is reiterated that in the

event the petitioners are taken to have been appointed as Village Extension Workers on 18th May, 1984 they shall be excluded from initial

constitution of the service as on 2.6.1988 under Jammu and Kashmir Agriculture (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1988. The petitioners

insist that in all the Government orders whereby any benefit was extended to the petitioners, their seniority was counted from the date of their initial

appointment as Rehbar-i-Zirat and not from the date they were designated as Village Extension Workers. Reference in this regard is made to

Government Order No. 175-Agri of 2002 dated 14.5.2002.

The petitioners on the strength of averments made in the petition, seek following reliefs:-

(i) A Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing government order No. 313 - Agri- of 2010 dated 27.12.2010

(Annexure - H) whereby the final seniority list of Village Extension Workers as it stood on 18th October, 1984 has been issued by the Respondent

No. 1.

(ii) A Writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus commanding upon the Respondent No. 1 to re-draw the final seniority list of

Village Extension Workers as it stood on 25th May, 1984 by taking into consideration the services rendered and experience gained by the

petitioners w.e.f. 25th May, 1984 when the petitioners were appointed as Rehbar-i-Zirat till 18th October, 1984 when the petitioners were

designated as Village Extension Workers.

(iii) A Writ, or direction in the nature of Writ of Prohibition restraining the respondents from holding the DPC/PSC for the purposes of making

regular promotions from the posts of Village Extension Workers to the posts of Agriculture Assistants and equivalent till the final seniority list of

Village Extension Workers as it stood on 25th May, 1984 is re-drawn by taking into consideration the services rendered and experience gained by

the petitioners w.e.f. 25th May, 1984 to 18th October, 1984 as aforesaid.

The writ petition is opposed by the respondents on the grounds that the seniority has reference to class, category and grade and as the

petitioners were formally appointed against the sanctioned posts of Village Extension Workers on 18th October, 1984, their seniority and other

service benefits are to accrue from the said date. It is pleaded that the period of engagement on consolidated salary on 25th May, 1984 to 17th

October, 1984 would not count towards seniority inasmuch as the petitioners were not regular employees of the Agricultural Production

Department till 18th October, 1984. It is denied that the representations made by the petitioners' and their colleagues in response to Circular No.

Agri-E-8(1)/2010 dated 29.10.2010, whereby tentative seniority list was notified were not considered. It is averred that the grounds urged in the

representations being in contravention of rules, the respondents were left with no option but to reject the representations. It is denied that the

Government Order No. 608-Agri of 1984 dated 18.10.1984, merely designated the petitioners as Village Extension Workers. The Government

order, it is insisted, for the first time, put the petitioners in a regular pay scale. The impugned final seniority list is said to have been made and issued

in compliance of judgment dated 19.2.2007 in SWP No. 184-05 titled Mohd. Qasim Ganaie v. State and Ors. and the order in Contempt Petition

arising out of SWP No. 44/2009 titled Chiranjeewan Razdan v. State and Ors. The respondents deny that any of the legal constitutional or

statutory rights of the petitioners was violated and insist that follow up action on final seniority list impugned in the writ petition, is rendered

necessary by the judgment 19.2.2007 in SWP No. 184/05 dated order in SWP No. 44/2009.

I have gone through the pleadings and have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The Jammu and Kashmir Agriculture (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1978 notified vide SRO 134 of 2nd March, 1978 categorized the

post of Agriculture Assistant and twelve posts equivalent to that of Agriculture Assistant as Class VI posts, prescribed B.Sc. Agriculture as

minimum qualification and the method of recruitment as direct recruitment. The Recruitments Rules of 1978 did not make room for appointment by

promotion to the post of Agriculture Assistant. The Rules of 1978 were replaced by the Jammu and Kashmir Agriculture (Gazetted) Service

Recruitment Rules, 1988. The Rules of 1988 categorized the post of Agriculture Assistant and 22 equivalent posts as Class VII posts, without any

change in the minimum qualification. However, the Rules of 1988 identified direct recruitment and promotion as two sources of recruitment to the

post of Agriculture Assistant and other equivalent posts - in terms of Rules of 1988. 50% of the posts are to be filled up by direct recruitment

preferably and 50% by promotion from Village Extension Workers possessing B.Sc. Agriculture Degree having minimum four years of experience

in that class. Rule 3 of the Rules of 1988 provides for constitution of the service. The Rule empowers the Government to appoint to the service, at

the commencement of the Rules, any person who at the commencement of the Rules of 1988 is holding any post in the sanctioned scale of pay

including in the cadre of the service. For the purpose of initial constitution of the service, the person holding any post included in the cadre of the

service in its sanctioned scale of pay is declared/ deemed to have been appointed to the service under Rules, if qualified to hold the post.

The absence of promotional avenues to the Subordinate Officers of the Agriculture Department under 1978 Rules and provision for such

avenues under 1988 Rules led to litigation between the Officers of the Department touching their inter se seniority. The present controversy though

not a direct fallout of such litigation, a brief reference to thereto, nonetheless is bound to help us understand the petitioners case and the

background in which the instant writ petition is filed.

The Court in Mohd. Qasim Ganaie v. State and Ors. (SWP 184-05) quashed the Government Order No. 31-Agri of 2005 dated 18.2.2005

and the seniority list holding that as the private respondents in the writ petition were appointed by promotion, as Agriculture Assistant dehors 1978

Rules, they were not holding the posts validly and not entitled to be deemed to have been appointed to the service in terms of Rule 3, Rules of

1988, The Court directed the official respondents to re-fix the seniority of the petitioners and private respondents in accordance with rules. It was

held that as Rules of 1978 did not contemplate appointment to the post of Agriculture Assistant and equivalent posts by promotion and the posts

were to be filled up exclusively by direct recruitment, the promotions offended Rules of 1978.

The disputes as regards inter se seniority re-surfaced in Chiranjeewan Razdan v. State and Ors. (SWP No. 44/2009) and more than a dozen

other writ petitions and the Court vide order dated 08.04.2010 noticing that the official respondents were contemplating a second look at the

seniority list by a committee directed the matter to be placed before the Sate Public Commission Departmental Promotion committee, once the

seniority list of all the Gazetted Officers assumed finality. The judgments in aforementioned case though expected to set at rest all controversies,

afford the official respondents an opportunity to rectify the mistakes and save the officers from avoidable litigation, yet the controversy refuses to

die down.

The controversy, in the present petition as already pointed out relates to the nature of service rendered by the petitioners and other Rehbar-i-

Zirat from 25th May, 1984 to 18th October, 1984 and to the plea whether this period is to be counted towards their seniority as Village Extension

Workers. It is pertinent to point out that if seniority of the petitioners as village Extension workers is counted from the day of their engagement as

Rehbar-i-Zirat i.e. 25.5.1984, the petitioners are to be taken to have completed four years as Village Extension Workers on 25.5.1988 and thus

become eligible to be members of the Agriculture (Gazetted) Service in terms of Rule 3 of 1988 Rules. The eligibility of the petitioners to be

members of the Agriculture (Gazetted) Service at the time of initial constitution of service shall open up new promotional avenues to the petitioners.

The petitioners were engaged as Rehbar-i-Zirat on a consolidated salary of Rs. 400/- per month. The petitioners were not placed in a regular

grade or pay scale till the petitioners were designated as Village Extension Workers vide order No. 608-Agri of 1984 dated 18th October, 1984

and placed in the pay scale of Rs. 825-1240. The Government Order No. 608-Agri of 1984 dated 18th October, 1984 though designating the

petitioners as Village Extension Workers in effect for the first time placed the petitioners in a regular grade or pay scale against sanctioned

vacancies/posts. In other words, the Government order No. 608-Agri of 1984 dated 18th October, 1984, irrespective of nature of the duties

performed by the petitioners, was in the nature of appointment of the petitioners in the aforesaid regular grade against sanctioned posts/vacancies

of Village Extension Workers, mention whereof is made in Rules of 1988. The petitioners in the circumstances cannot claim seniority as Village

Extension Workers with effect from the date of their appointment as Rehbar-i-Zirat on a consolidated salary of Rs. 400/- per month. It is not the

nature of duties performed that is the determining factor for an answer to the controversy raised in the petition but nature of appointment and the

post(s) against which the appointment is made. The nature of the appointment as also the post(s) against which the appointment was made in

favour of the petitioners on 25th May, 1984 is different and distinct from the nature of appointment and the post(s) against the appointment is made

on 18th October, 1984. The petitioners thus cannot be taken to have been appointed as Village Extension Workers with effect from 25th May,

1984 when they were neither appointed in a regular grade or pay scale nor against the post of Village Extension Workers but merely appointed on

a consolidated pay of Rs. 400/- per month and that too against a different post.

The case set up by the petitioners, apart from being not sustainable on the ground of marked difference between the position and status of the

petitioners from 25th May, 1984 to 18th October, 1984 and from 18th October, 1984 onwards, is in Conflict with mandate of Articles 14 and 16

Constitution of India. It is important to note that when the Government decided to address the problem of unemployment of Agricultural

Graduates, by creating a cadre of Rehbar-i-Zirat with the strength of 300 personnel, it offered a consolidated pay of Rs. 400/- per month to an

aspirant with degree in Agriculture Science. In case the period that the petitioners served as Rehbar-i-Zirat is counted for the purpose of seniority

as Village Extension Officer, those of the Agricultural Graduates who did not opt for Rehbar-i-Zirat because of the pay package offered or other

reasons, instead waited to compete for the posts of Village Extension Worker and were so appointed on or after 18th October, 1984 would be

put to a disadvantageous position and exposed to an unequal treatment offending the right of equality. The reason being that such appointees were

never informed that in the event they took up the job of Rehbar-i-Zirat on a consolidated pay of Rs. 400/- per month their seniority as Village

Extension Workers would be reckoned from the date of appointment as Rehbar-i-Zirat. Needless to mention that vide Government Order No.

607-Agri of 1984 dated 18.10.1984 as many as 1000 posts of Village Extension Workers were created and the petitioners and other Rehbar-i-

Zirat constituted less than 1 /3rd of the posts so created. It follows that 700 Agricultural Graduates other than Rehbar-i-Zirat were appointed as

Village Extension Workers in wake of Government Order No. 607-Agri of 1984 dated 18.10.1984. An exercise to treat the petitioners and other

Rehbar-i-Zirat as a Class distinct from other Agricultural Graduates, would be without any intelligible differentia amounting to unreasonable

classification and violation of Article 14 and 16 Constitution of India.

The writ petition, for the reasons discussed above, is bereft of any merit and liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed

along with all connected CMP(s). Interim direction, is revoked.