AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Leave granted.
The only question in whether the respondents are eligible to be considered for appointment as Clerks in 'A' Class offices on the admitted position that they are not matriculates with first division. The High court in W.P. No. 11553/93 by judgment dated 14.7.94 found them to be eligible. Admittedly, the respondents are dependents of ex-servicemen. The Government while reserving the posts for ex-servicemen, have prescribed qualifications for the posts in class 'A' offices, as under :-
Qualifications of the posts of Clerks, Steno-typists and Stenographers in all 'A' class offices.
For Class 'B' offices, it was prescribed thus:
Qualifications of the posts of Clerks, Steno-typists and Stenographers in all 'A' class offices other than 'A' class offices:
In the year 1979 while giving benefit of reservation to the children of Ex-Servicemen, by proceedings dated March 21, 1979, it was stated thus :
It has been observed that due to nonavailability of suitable candidates for the reserved quota, the recruitment of Ex-servicemen to the civil posts is not being made to the desired extent. In view of this, it has been decided that the dependent sons and daughters of Ex-servicemen, who fulfill all the conditions of qualifications, age etc. prescribed jor various posts, should also be considered on merits for the posts reserved for the Ex-servicemen to the extent of non-availability of suitable Ex-servicemen. This entitlement would be available to one dependent child only.
(Emphasis supplied)
A reading of these conditions would clearly indicate that if the ex-servicemen are considered for appointment in "A' Class offices, they may be mere Matriculate only. The qualification of First Division in Secondary or Second Division in Intermediate is necessary for general candidates. With regard to the appointments in 'B' Class offices this condition was not incorporated. For children of ex-servicemen, they are required to fulfill all the conditions of qualifications prescribed for the posts and be considered on merits for appointment to the unfilled posts reserved for ex-servicemen.
Respondents contend that since the advertisement, Annexure R-I, dated 7.9.91, does not prescribe any distinction between 'A' class and 'B' class offices and had only mentioned about Matriculation as the respondents had secured Matriculation, they are eligible on par with the ex-servicemen for appointment in 'A' class posts. We find no force as the advertisement dealt with Clerks in geernal; it did not say about Clerk in 'A' class office. It has already been seen that in case ex-serviceman is not available and there exists vacancy reserved for ex-serviceman, the dependent i.e. son or daughter of ex-servicemen, is eligible for consideration to appointment but subject to the candidates possessing qualifications prescribed for the posts. One of the conditions is that in case of the dependent, he shall also be required to be a Matriculation with First Division or Intermediate with Second Division. Such candidate alone is eligible for appointment in 'A' class office. The benefit of mere Matriculation is available to the ex-servicemen only. Dependent's son or daughter cannot be considered to be an ex-serviceman. The benefit of giving reservation to the dependents is only to see that the posts reserved for ex-servicemen" may not be allowed to be lapsed for non-availability of ex-servicemen.
Considered from this perspective, we are of the view that the respondents are not entitled for appointment in 'A' class offices since they do not have First Division in Matriculation nor that they are ex-servicemen.
The appeals are accordingly allowed but in the circumstances without costs. The writ petitions filed in the High Court stand dismissed.