2000 (4) TMI 819

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e AMIE Diploma is recognised by the Central Government as being on par with a Bachelors Degree of Engineering for the purpose of recruitment to superior posts under the Central Government. The question is whether the respondent No. 1 was eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer in 1991. The Rules regulating the recruitment to the post of Superintending Engineers of the State of Manipur were notified on 18th October 1977. The Rules called The Manipur P.W.D./Irrigation and Flood Control/Public Health Engineering (Superintending Engineer (Civil)/Superintending Surveyor of Works) Recruitment Rules, 1977 provide that the post of Superintending Engineer shall be filled up by promotion from Executive Engineer ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dismissed and the decision of the learned Single Judge was upheld. There is no dispute that as on 1991 the respondent no.1/writ petitioner had put in more than 6 years regular service in the grade. Of that period only a little over 2 years was after he was granted the AMIE Diploma. The controversy hinges on the interpretation of the word with used in the eligibility criteria. The word with has been defined in the New Shorter Oxford Dictionary (1993),diversely the meaning depending on the context in which it is used. But when it is used to connect two nouns it means Accompanied by; having as an addition or accompaniment. Frequently used to connect two nouns, in the sense and as well. Applying the definition to the eligibility criteria it is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or to the obtaining the degree was not counted. Since this practice had been consistently followed and was understood as such by all concerned, the Court held that it would not be justified in taking the contrary view and unsettling the settled practice in the Department. The decision in Suresh Nathans case has been explained in M.B. Joshi and Others V. Satish Kumar Pandey and Others 1993 Supp (2) SCC 419 ; D. Stephen Joseph V. Union of India and Others 1997 (4) SCC 753 and finally in Anil Kumar Gupta and Others V. Municipal Corporation of Delhi (2000) 1 SCC 128 as being limited to the facts of that case. In M.B. Joshis case the decision in Suresh Nathan case was distinguished in the facts of that case and it was indicated that when the lan....