http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: BANDAN BAYEN & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT07/12/1995

BENCH: K.RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      The  only  question  in  this  appeal  is  whether  the respondents are  governed by the Rules for the regulation of the recruitment  to the  clerical service of the Secretariat and certain  other offices  of the Government of West Bengal issued in Notification No. 2083-F dated July 21, 1954 or the West Bengal Boards Miscellaneous Rules, 1955 for appointment to the  Lower Divisions.  The facts  are not in dispute. The appellant called  for the names from the Employment Exchange in the  notification for  recruitment. Calling  their names, the appellants  prescribed passing  of the written exams and typing with  30 w.p.m.  speed as  qualification  apart  from other qualifications.  Pursuant thereto,  the names  of  the candidates have  been sent. 545 candidates were qualified in the written examination and were required to pass the typing test. After  conducting the  typing test, respondents 44-189 had passed  the test  and the other respondents did not pass the test.  Consequently, they  could not  be appointed. When they had  approached the  High  Court  under  Art.  226  for necessary directions, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition.  But on  appeal, the Division Bench in F.M.A. No. 648/91 by order dated April 27, 1992 set aside the order of  the   learned  single   Judge  and   directed  that  the appointment  of  respondents  44-189  were  not  upset.  Yet directed  that   the  respondents   be  appointed.   Feeling aggrieved, this appeal by special leave has been filed.      Pursuant to  our directions dated November 2, 1995, the appellants have placed on record the relevant Rules relating to the  Schedule 2,  2-A as  enumerated in  Rule  4  of  the Secretariat Rules  referred  to  hereinbefore.  In  form  of notification it is stated in column 3(c) thus:      "Qualification required:      School Final  or  its  equivalent.  Must      have knowledge  in English Typing with a      minimum speed  of  30  words  p.m.  Such      knowledge in typing is not essential for      the physically handicapped persons."      Under Rule  65 of the West Bengal Board’s Miscellaneous Rules, 1955  qualifications for permanent appointment to the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

Lower Division are specified of which condition (d) provides that:      "In  the   case  of   vacancies  in  the      district or  sub-divisional  offices  an      examination of candidates should be held      after  due   notice  within  the  period      mentioned in  rule 62 to select the best      persons for  the posts.  The examination      will be  held in  English and Bengali to      test (a)  handwriting, (b)  knowledge in      English   and    Bengali   (c)   general      knowledge and  intelligence. There  will      be one  paper  to  be  answered  in  two      hours. The  tet for  typewriting will be      for half  an hour. A candidate should be      able  to   transcribe  accurately   from      legible handwriting  at a  rate  of  not      less than  30 words  per minute  and the      paper will  be marked  on the basis of a      penalty of  five words for every mistake      e.g. misspelling,  wrong spacing,  wrong      paragraphing.  One   letter  typed  over      another, etc.  The  manuscript  will  be      such as  is used  in ordinary Government      Correspondence  and  the  percentage  of      errors permissible  shall  not  be  more      than 5  percent. The examinations should      be held  by the  District officer  or by      any senior  Gazetted officer  to whom he      may delegate the duty."      As noted  earlier, pursuant  to the  advertisement  and prescription of  the qualification,  the respondent Nos.1 to 43 had  appered and  sat  for  the  examination.  They  were qualified in the written examination. They had also appeared for the typing test and therein they were not qualified. The question thus  emerges  whether  the  West  Bengal  Services (Secretariat Common  Cadre)  Rules,  1984  (for  short  ‘the Rules’) issued  under proviso to Art.309 of the Constitution would be  applicable to the method of recruitment of L.D.Cs. to be  appointed in the district and sub-divisional offices. The  Rules   themselves  clearly   envisage  that  they  are applicable to  Secretariat Common  Cadre Rules. Rule 4 which is relevant in this case postulates that notwithstanding the provisions of  the West  Bengal (Classification  Control and Appeal) Rules,  1971, the  competent authority  to make  the recruitment  is  envisaged  in  Rule  7.  Rule  4  would  be applicable to  the list  of  departments  specified  in  the Schedule.  Schedule   has  been  appended  and  clause  (iv) envisages ‘Department  of Land and Land Reforms". At the end it is  stated under the head ‘Offices’ ‘1. Board of Revenue, West Bengal’.      Relying upon  these rules,  Shri M.N.  Krishnamani, the learned Senior  counsel for  the respondents  1-43 contended that the  respondents working  in the Department of Land and Land  Reforms  are  controlled  by  the  Board  of  Revenue. Therefore, they  are required  to be  governed by  the Rules which though  initially prescribed  pass of  the typing test but it is not a condition for appointment. The qualification could be  acquired during  probation. That rule subsequently was deleted, consequently, the respondent Nos. 1-43 need not pass the accounts test. We find no force in the contention.      It is  seen that  the Rules  themselves  would  clearly indicate that they are applicable to the Secretariat and the Offices mentioned  in the  Schedule. Department  of Land and Land Reforms  mentioned in  the Schedule  is a Department in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

the Secretariat.  In the ‘Offices’ it is mentioned the Board of Revenue.  It would  thus be  seen that  Secretariat is  a separate wing  and the  Board of  Revenue is the Head of the Department. That  gets manifested when we see Schedule 2 and Schedule 2-C  attached to  the West  Bengal  Public  Service Commission Regulation,  1937. It  clearly enumerates various clerical establishment,  stenographers  and  typist  of  the Secretariat and typists in all the departments. They are all heads of  Departments. That  was also manifested in Schedule 2-C including  the Inspector  General  of  Prisons  and  the Conservator of  Forests. It  would thus  be  seen  that  the regulations   for   recruitment   through   Public   Service Commission  are   in  respect   of  clerical  establishment, stenographers and  typists of  the Secretariat and the heads of the departments. Regulation 31 excludes other departments which envisages thus:      "It shall  not be  necessary to  consult      the  Commission   with  respect  to  the      matters specified in clauses (a) and (b)      of sub-section (3) of section 266 of the      Act for any service or post not included      in  Schedule   "C"  annexed  hereto  the      appointing authority  for  which  is  an      authority subordinate  to the Provincial      Government."      In other  words, except  those mentioned  in Schedule 2 and  2-C,  all  other  departments  in  other  respects  the district  and   sub-divisional  offices  stand  excluded  by operation of Regulation 31 of the West Bengal Public Service Commission Regulation  1937. Once  they stand  excluded from the  recruitment  by  the  Public  Service  Commission,  the necessary concomitant result would be that they are governed by the  Board’s  miscellaneous  Rules,  1955.  They  clearly envisage  passing   of  typing   as  a   qualification   for appointment as  a LDC  in the  district  and  sub-divisional offices. It  would, therefore, be clear that the recruitment was properly and legally made, respondent Nos. 1-43 and 114- 120 having appeared and failed in typing examination, cannot now  turn   round  and  contend  that  the  said  rules  are inapplicable and  the Rules are applicable to them. Our view gets support  also frm  the decision  of this  Court in C.A. 4531/92, dated October 22, 1992.      In case  of future  recruitment, it  may be open to the respondent  Nos.   1-43  and   114-120  to  appear  for  the examination and  claim their  right  to  be  considered  for recruitment as  LDCs. In  the event if any of them happen to be barred  by age,  necessary relaxation of age may be given and they may be considered according to rules.      The appeal  is accordingly allowed and the order of the Division Bench  is set  aside and that of the learned single Judge stands confirmed. No costs.