Keshav Kant Tewari vs Life Insurance Corporation Bombay & Anr.

D.K. Seth, J.

Pursuant to an advertisement published on 2061989 inviting applications for the post of Assistant in the Divisional Office of Life Insurance Corporation of India, in district Gorakhpur, the petitioner appeared in the written examination fixed on 22101989 and was duly selected and was called for interview alongwith others on 12121989. Out of the ''325'' persons called for interview, after being successful in written examination, ''160'' persons who were selected finally were given appointment letters and contingency list or''180'' other persons were prepared for being accommodated in future vacancy during the next two years. The petitioner''s name did not figure either in the select list or in the contingency list. The petitioner claimed preference on account of his passing the ''Licentiate examination'' conducted by the Federation of Insurance Institute. According to him, in view of the Clause 10, as contained in the Examination Hand Book of the Federation of Insurance Institute, the petitioner should have been given appointment by giving preference because of his additional qualification of having passed the Licentiate examination. Despite representation the petitioner has not been given preference in the selection. All his representations dated 1971991, 2081991, 1791991, 4111991 (Annexures7,8,9 and 10 to the writ petition) have been ignored. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned selection and A mandamus commanding the respondents to select the petitioner by giving preference on account of his additional qualification.

After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.P. Goel, learned counsel for the respondents it appears that the advertisement for the post did not contain any condition that any preference should be given on account of alleged additional qualification of the petitioner. Nothing has been shown to this Court that the alleged qualification is an additional qualification, entitling the petitioner to preference. Clause 10 of the Examination Hand Book of the Federation of Insurance Institute, provides "LIC and GIC have decided that in all future recruitment preference will be given, other things being equal, to the persons who have passed the Licentiate examination of the Federation of Insurance Institute." No decision of LIC or GIC to that effect have been produced before this Court.

In the counteraffidavit, it has been contended that the said Clause D does not find the L.I.C. in the matter of recruitment, which is being governed by the statutory regulations, namely L.I.C. of India Recruitment (of ClassIII and ClassIV Staff) Instruction, 1979. Nothing has been shown as to how the alleged qualification is recognised for the purposes of recruitment in the Organisation of the respondents. In any event the Recruitment regulation having statutory force the respondents L.I.C. can not ignore the same. The nonstatutory organisation namely, Federation of Insurance Institute can not lay down any conditions for recruitment to the post in L.I.C. Neither the decision of nonstatutory authority is binding on the statutory authority. Even, though unless it is incorporated in the regulation, no benefit can be had out of the alleged additional qualification. It is to take a shape in the form of regulation by its incorporation in the Recruitment Regulation, being 1979 Instruction. Admittedly, 1979 Instruction does not provide for giving of any preference on account of the alleged qualification. Unless sunnorted by the Statute and stipulated in the advertisement the alleged additional qualification of the petitioner cannot be recognised for grant of preference.

In that view of the matter, the petitioner cannot claim any benefit of preference on account of Clause 10 of the said examination Hand Book of the Institute which neither has any statutory force nor is binding of L.I.C. out of his alleged additional qualification, in the facts and the circumstances of the case.

In the result the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. There will be, however, no order as to costs.