Judgment:
Hon'ble Sri K. George Joseph, Administrative Member
The applicant is promoted as Junior Accounts Officer in the B.S.N.L. on the basis of an All India test. The successful candidates in the said test are listed in the order of merit and promotion also is given accordingly. While undergoing induction training a new condition is introduced for fixing inter se seniority of the promotees based on the performance/marks in the said training. The applicant challenges the introduction of the new policy for fixing inter se seniority of promotee Junior Accounts Officers.
2. It was the legitimate expectation of the applicant that merit in the competitive examination along with the successful completion of induction training will decide her seniority. In the eyes of the applicant a new policy has been introduced for deciding inter se seniority of the departmental JAOs by Exhibit P6 dated 19.10.06. The relevant extract from the said Annexure is given below:
"The inter-se-seniority of Departmental JAO's is to be fixed on the overall performance /marks obtained by the candidates in all the Three Phases of Induction Training. Accordingly Training Centres are requested to please send full details in respect of the performance/marks obtained by the candidates to the CGM NATFM, Hyderabad for further necessary action/consolidation."
The applicant could have appreciated the new policy had it been declared before Exhibit P4 as a paradigm change of policy of the company. Exhibit P4 is the list of successful candidates in the departmental examination of Junior Accounts Officers held in March, 2006 arranged in the order of merit. The applicant is not challenging the policy of the company but only the arbitrary manner of introduction of a policy change while the induction training is halfway through.
3. According to the respondents, it is the policy of the company that the seniority of the candidates is dependent on his/her performance during the training. Para 9 of Exhibit P7(3) stipulates that seniority will be fixed as per final merit list to be drawn by DE section of B.S.N.L Corporate Office and will be intimated in due course. So it is clear that the seniority list is not the already published merit list under Exhibit P4. But a new list being compiled from the marks obtained in the examination during the training. The All India test which the applicant participated in was an examination held in a decentralised manner in Telecom Circles with different sets of question papers for each Circle and merit list prepared Circle-wise according to the vacancy in each Circle. Such a merit list cannot be combined to prepare an All India list. The policy regarding fixing up seniority based on the performance in training already exists. Seniority of hundreds of executives in technical cadres such as JTOs appointed in BSNL before the petitioner had already been fixed on this principle. The petitioner is ranked only for the Circle where she is working. For Al India merit list separate guidelines are issued by the B.S.N.L which bring common parameters for all candidates. The performance in the training is one such parameter suitable for fixing the inter-se-seniority of candidates selected from various Circles with Circle-wise merit lists.
4. From the arguments of the learned counsel and the documents presented it is clear that the policy of fixing inter-se-seniority of promotee officers selected through a decentralised All India test, on the basis of performance in the induction training, is already in existence and is not a new policy ,as understood by the applicant. Her apprehension that Exhibit P6 which for her was the announcement of a new policy for fixing inter-se-seniority was introduced mid-way through the induction training is aimed at disturbing the order of merit to her disadvantage, appears to be without any basis. Exhibit P4 does not speak about seniority. The subject matter of fixing seniority is strictly within the domain of the respondent company. The applicant is not put to any disadvantage so far. No cause of action has arisen for the applicant to approach this Tribunal. However it is in the interest of proper management of human resource that the B.S.N.L. should clear any apprehension in the minds of its employees about fixation of seniority. The applicant had voiced her concerns about Exhibit P6 in her letter marked as Exhibit P8. It is seen that B.S.N.L has not yet made a reply to this letter. It is not clear to the applicant how the overall performance/marks obtained by the candidates in the induction training is to be arrived at.
5. In our view, having regard to various concerns of the applicant over fixation of seniority, this T.A. can be disposed of by directing the respondents to give a reply to the Exhibit P8 letter of the applicant clarifying various issues raised in this T.A. concerning fixation of seniority.
6. Accordingly the respondents are directed to consider Exhibit P8 and other concerns of the applicant over seniority voiced in this T.A. and give suitable self contained reply to the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.