PER: JUSTICE S. SUJATHA, MEMBER (J)

1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:

“1. Call for the records leading to non filling of the 4 LDC post vacant during 2012, 2014, 2016 & 2017 based on the eligibility list for the respective years and also based on the prevailing recruitment rules vide Annexure-A2 dated 07.10.2009.

2. This Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the respondents

I) To appoint the applicant on regular basis as LDC from the date of LDC vacancies during the year 2012, onwards vide Annexure-A1, on the basis of eligibility list drawn as on 01.08.2013 of Annexure-A9, and Annexure-A12 & Annexure-A16, and clarification issued by the 3rd respondents vide Annexure-A17, and extend all consequential service and financial benefits admissible to the applicant.

II) To draw a proper eligibility list of MTS eligible to the post of LDC under 5% seniority cum fitness quota at Annexure—12, and convene in the DPC to considered the vacant post of LDC on year wise of vacancies of 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2018 on the basis of prevailing recruitment rules of Annexure-A2 dated 17.10.2009 and stay the Annexure-A18 till further order by this Hon’ble Tribunal orders.

3. Pass any other order or direction that this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice and equity, including the order as to the cost.”

2. Briefly stated the facts as narrated by the applicant are that he joined as Peon w.e.f. 25.01.1990 at Civil Construction Wing (CCW), All India Radio (AIR) and TV, Bengaluru and subsequently appointed as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on ad-hoc basis (for a period of 89 days) since 2006 to 2012. It is the grievance of the applicant that 4 LDC posts during the years 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017 have not been filled based on the educational qualification and prevailing Recruitment Rules. However, the respondents are proposing to appoint the ineligible candidates by calling the details for convening the DPC ignoring the communication dated 17.12.2018 issued by the Deputy Director General (E) to the Head of Office, All India Radio requesting the details of the eligible candidates for promotion to the post of LDC from educationally qualified Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) by way of Seniority-cum-Fitness, for conducting DPC where PUC was considered as the required educational qualification. Hence, this application.

3. Learned counsel Shri A.R Holla representing the applicant submitted that as per the Model Recruitment Rules for the post of Lower Division Clerk issued vide OM dated 07.10.2009, 12th class or equivalent qualification from a recognized Board or University was the required educational qualification for the post of Lower Division Clerk. Considering the same, eligibility list of educationally qualified Group C MTS employees working in All India Radio Stations/Doordarshan Kendras/DMC/CCW offices in Karnataka Zone who completed three years of regular service as on 01.07.2018, for promotion to the post of Lower Division Clerk under Departmental Examination quota and Seniority-cum-Fitness quota was prepared as per Annexure-A12. The applicant's name figures at Sl. No 1 in the said list, based on which the names of candidates eligible for promotion to the post of LDC from educationally qualified MTS for conducting DPC was shortlisted as per the communication dated 17.12.2018 (Annexure-A16). Giving a go by to these lists, new eligibility list was prepared for conducting DPC, dropping the name of the applicant. The right accrued to the applicant under Annexures-A12 and A16 have been nullified by issuing the new eligibility list prepared, considering the matriculation as the minimum educational qualification for 5% of vacancies from among the employees of Akashavani or Doordarshan having three years regular service in the post in Level-1 (Rs. 18000-56900) in pay matrix. Learned counsel argued that the eligibility list prepared and the particulars sought for conducting DPC for the list comprising of the applicant herein dated 17.12.2018 (AnnexureA16) has to be given effect to.

4. Learned counsel Shri N.B. Patil representing the respondents has filed a memo with a brief note enclosed with certain documents (A to F) along with the records in original in addition to the reply statement filed on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsel submitted that the office letter dated 17.12.2018 (Annexure-A16) referred by the learned counsel for the applicant has been superseded in terms of the letter dated 20.12.2018. Action was initiated by AIR, Bengaluru to fill up the 4 vacancies of LDC for the years 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017 by promotion from amongst educationally qualified MTS of AIR and Doordarshan (DD) having three years regular service in post Level-1. By inadvertence, the details of candidates having PUC qualification only were sought from respective offices as per the letter dated 17.12.2018 (Annexure-A16). Subsequently, it was noticed that the qualification for promotion from MTS to LDC mentioned in DG; AIR letter dated 12.12.2018 (Annexure-A14) was matriculation. Accordingly, information of MTS who possessed qualification of matriculation was sought from all the regional offices of AIR/DD for preparing the eligibility list/s. Accordingly, draft eligibility lists were prepared for the years 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017.

5. Meanwhile, the applicant submitted a representation dated 23.01.2019 to consider his case for promotion to the post of LDC by taking the educational qualification of PUC/12th standard. Hence, a clarification was sought from DG; AIR with regard to educational qualification for filling up the said vacancies. The DG; AIR vide letter dated 25.07.2019 clarified/confirmed that the educational qualification for promotion from MTS to LDC is matriculation/10th standard as per Recruitment Rules issued vide Gazette Notification dated 14.11.1994. Accordingly, the final eligibility list of MTS for the years 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017 were finalized by letter dated 02.08.2019. Learned counsel argued that no right has been accrued to the applicant by issuing the draft eligibility list. The misconception of the minimum educational qualification required for promotion, having been set right as per the Recruitment Rules, by issuing the subsequent communications/letters, the applicant’s claim has no merit. Hence, seeks for dismissal of the application.

6. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

7. Strong reliance placed on the OM dated 7.10.2009 (Annexure-A2) on the basis of which the eligibility list of educationally qualified Group ‘D’ employees who have completed three years of regular service for the years 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017 prepared earlier (Annexure-A16) relates to Model Recruitment Rules for the post of Lower Division Clerk. In the said Model Recruitment Rules, for the post of LDC, educational qualification is prescribed as 12th class or equivalent qualification from a recognized Board or University. Recruitment Rules for the post of LDC dated 14.11.1994 prescribes the educational qualification for direct recruits as matriculation or an equivalent examination from a recognized Board/University. The same educational qualification is prescribed in case of promotion in Column 9 of the said Rules. Recruitment Rules 2018 prescribes the educational qualification as matriculation or equivalent qualification from a recognized Board or University for promotion to 5% vacancies from amongst employees of Akashavani or Doordarshan having three years regular service in the post in Level-1. In both the Recruitment Rules of 1994 and 2018, minimum educational qualification prescribed is matriculation. As the aforesaid Recruitment Rules were holding the field, the eligibility list prepared based on the Model Recruitment Rules, considering the minimum educational qualification as 12th class or equivalent qualification from a recognized Board or University, cannot be countenanced.

8. In the said Model Recruitment Rules - OM dated 07.10.2009 (Annexure-A2), in Column 8, educational qualification is shown as 12th class or equivalent qualification from a recognized Board or University. In Column 9, “Whether age and educational qualifications prescribed for direct recruitment will apply in the case of promotees”, it is shown as “Yes, to the extent indicated in Column 11”. Column 11 reads thus:

“(i) 85 % by direct recruitment through SSC. (The words "through SSC" may be deleted, where recruitment is not through SSC).

(ii) 10% of the vacancies shall be filled from amongst the Group C Staff in the Grade Pay of Rs. 1800 and who possess 12th Class pass or equivalent qualification and have rendered 3 years regular service in the grade, on the basis of departmental qualifying examination. The maximum age limit for eligibility for examination is 45 years. (50 years of age for the SC/ST)

Note:- If more of such employees than the number of vacancies available under Clause (ii) qualified at the examination, such excess number of employees shall be considered for filling the vacancies arising in the subsequent years so that the employees qualifying at an earlier examination are considered before those who qualify at a later examination.

(iii) 5% of the vacancies shall be filled on senioritycum-fitness basis from Group C employees who have 3 years regular service in posts with the Grade Pay of Rs. 1800.”

9. It is significant to note that in Column No. 11 (iii), no minimum educational qualification of 12th class pass or equivalent qualification unlike clause (ii) is prescribed. Hence, Model Recruitment Rules (Annexure-A2) would not come to the assistance of the applicant. The entire case of the applicant based on the Model Recruitment Rules has no legs to stand. The Recruitment Rules 2018 being published by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting vide Notification dated 13.09.2018, these Model Recruitment Rules relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant has no credential value. It is well settled that there can be no estoppel against a statute/legal provision. Clarification dated 21.12.2018 (Annexure-A17) issued by Director General refers to the subject – Compassionate appointment in Prasar Bharati. The clarification dated 25.07.2019 issued by the Director General, AIR would make it clear that the minimum educational qualification for promotion to the 5% vacancies from among employees of Akashavani or Doordarshan having three years regular service in the post in Level-1 is matriculation (10th) or equivalent qualification from a recognized Board or University. Hence, any eligibility list prepared on a wrong notion considering PUC or equivalent qualification as the minimum educational qualification leading to the letter dated 17.12.2018 would not create any legal right. No vested right has been accrued to the applicant in view of the subsequent letter dated 20.12.2018 issued by the Deputy Director General (E)/AIR, Bangalore in supersession of the said office letter dated 17.12.2018.

10. For the reasons aforesaid, the application is devoid of merit.

11. In the result, OA stands dismissed. No order as to costs.