FACTS:
Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. is a GoI undertaking. 38 vacancies of Mazdoors, Category-I (I.T.I.) had occurred in the MCL. MCL sent a requisition to the local employment exchange for sending a list of eligible candidates. They, in response, sponsored 664 candidates. Out of these, 375 candidates submitted their biodata. After scrutiny of the biodata, MCL called 316 candidates for the written test. Finally, 240 candidates secured qualifying marks. There is a dispute of fact about merit list as according to the contesting writ petitioners, a merit list comprising 226 I.T.I. candidates was prepared by the MCL as they were found suitable, but MCL denies having prepared a merit list of 226 candidates for employment. However, it is an admitted position that, of the candidates who secured qualifying marks, 24 were given appointment as I.T.I. 5 vacancies in the trade of Auto Electrician and 9 vacancies in SC/ ST category – could not be filled up due to non-availability of the candidates. Subsequently, fresh 84 vacancies of Mazdoor Category-I (I.T.I.) occurred and MCL requested the local employment exchange for their permission to fill up fresh vacancies from amongst the candidates who had qualified in the written test and the trade test conducted as above. There was no response from the local employment exchange and, accordingly, MCL filled up 51 vacancies out of 84 fresh vacancies by giving employment to those candidates who had already undergone the apprenticeship with them in the year 1991-92. The present appellants are amongst those candidates.
The private respondents herein and few others aggrieved by the appointment of the appellants and some others to the posts of I.T.I. having been given preference as they had undergone the apprenticeship with the MCL, filed various writ petitions before the High Court of Orissa. They prayed that appointments given to 51 such appointees be quashed. They also prayed for their absorption in the vacant posts without calling them to appear for fresh written test and/or interview.
ARGUMENTS BY THE DEFENCE:
The defence of the MCL was that the preference was given to the apprentices who had undergone training with them in the interest of the company as coal mines use very specific and specialized high value heavy earth moving machines like dragline, shovel, dumpers, heavy duty dazers, drills and craines and those who have been extensively trained on these machines are of much use than the candidates who were trained in other industries not dealing with heavy earth moving machines. They justified their action on the basis of a decision of the Apex Court in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and Anr v. U.P. Parivahan Nigam Shishukhs Berozgar Sangh and Ors, (1995) 2 SCC 1. It was submitted by MCL that the preference to MCL apprentices was not influenced by any consideration other than the interest of the company.
DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT:
The High Court, however, held that MCL ought to have filled up the newly sanctioned 51 posts of I.T.I. from the merit list prepared earlier strictly in the order of merit and no preference could have been given to those who had undertaken apprenticeship with MCL. The High Court further directed that those who were likely to lose their job could be adjusted in suitable posts in the existing and future vacancies without asking them to face any recruitment test. Accordingly, these appeals were laid before the Supreme Court.
DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT:
The Court observed that the appellants were impleaded for the first time after ten years or so. By that time the appellants got promoted from Mazdoor Category-I to Mazdoor Category-II and then to Mazdoor Category-III and thereafter to the posts of Fitter. In view of these circumstances, the Court held, the writ petitioners were not entitled to any discretionary relief by the High Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction.
The Court further stated that on promotion of the appellants to the higher posts, other candidates have been appointed to the posts of Mazdoor – Category I in place of the appellants. If the order of the High Court is allowed to stand, it would not only affect the appellants who, during the continuation of their service, had got three promotions, but also will seriously affect the persons who have been appointed in their place and were not impleaded before the High Court.
The appeals were, accordingly, allowed and the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Orissa, Cuttack was set aside.