Recruitment into a new cadre is not promotion, obviating M. Nagaraj reservation requirements.

Applicant Nos. 1, 2, and 4 in OA No. 1526/2021 joined BSNL as Junior Telecom Officers (JTOs) between 2003 and 2007, subsequently being promoted to Sub Divisional Engineers (SDEs)

Applicant No. 3 is a service association representing affected employees

In OA No. 1559/2021, applicants Chander Singh and Ajit Kumar, graduates in Electronics and Communication Engineering, joined as GE-JTOs in 2002 and 2003 respectively, and were promoted as SDEs

They completed the requisite four years of executive service and were eligible for Internal Competitive Examination for promotion to DE/AGM level positions from 2009-10 to 2012-13, but no such examinations were conducted for these years

The BSNL Management Trainees Recruitment Rules, 2009 (MTRR, 2009) initially governed such recruitments, with 50% posts for Management Trainees (MT) being open to internal and external candidates, and the remaining 50% for internal candidates

Revised BSNL Management Trainees Recruitment Rules, 2013 (MTRR, 2013) superseded the MTRR, 2009 on 05.07.2013, introducing an upper age limit of 40 years for internal candidates and fixing the ratio of internal to external candidates at 50:50

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) issued a notification dated 11.12.2018 for 150 vacancies of Management Trainee (Telecom Operations) for internal candidates, reserving 23 posts for SC and 11 for ST candidates

This notification was issued under the MTRR, 2013

The applicants in OA No. 1526/2021 challenged the reservation provisions, arguing non-compliance with the requirements of M. Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh regarding quantifiable data on inadequacy of representation

The applicant in OA No. 1526/2021 participated in the selection process, appeared in the examination, and failed to qualify

The applicants in OA Nos. 1559/2021 and 1560/2021 challenged the recruitment notification dated 11.12.2018, contending that vacancies from 2009-2013 should be governed by the MTRR, 2009, not the MTRR, 2013, and that a single consolidated examination for vacancies spanning multiple years was illegal, contrary to previous judgments

They also highlighted a communication dated 23.01.2014 which diverted 25% of MT quota posts to the seniority/promotion quota

1. Whether the reservation provided for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the recruitment notification dated 11.12.2018 for the post of Management Trainee (Internal) is valid, despite the absence of quantifiable data on inadequacy of representation, in light of M. Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh principles

2. Whether the recruitment process for Management Trainees, initiated under the BSNL Management Trainees Recruitment Rules, 2013, should have followed year-wise examinations for vacancies arising from earlier years (2009-2013) which were governed by the BSNL Management Trainees Recruitment Rules, 2009

3. Whether the applicants, having participated in the selection process initiated by the impugned notification, are estopped from challenging the same after being unsuccessful

The court primarily applied the principle that the constitutional requirements for reservation in promotion, particularly the collection of quantifiable data demonstrating inadequacy of representation (as established in M. Nagaraj & Others v. Union of India & Others, (2006) 8 SCC 212 and clarified in Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, 2018 (4) SCT 445), apply to promotion within an existing cadre structure and not to induction into a distinct, newly constituted, and previously vacant cadre

It also applied the legal principle that candidates who participate in a selection process with full knowledge of its terms cannot subsequently assail the process after being unsuccessful, citing Anupal Singh & Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2020) 2 SCC 173

Furthermore, the court referred to the established legal principle that recruitment must be governed by the Rules in force at the time of the recruitment notification, and that existing vacancies are not automatically carried forward to be filled under revoked rules, distinguishing Y.V. Rangaiah and others Versus J. Sreenivasa Rao and others, 1983(1) SLR 789 as inapplicable where a new recruitment process is initiated under superseded rules

The court found that the recruitment to the Management Trainee cadre was not a conventional promotion within an existing cadre but rather an induction into a distinct and newly constituted cadre (E-3 grade), open to various internal and external candidates through a merit-based competitive examination

Therefore, the constitutional requirements of M. Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh regarding quantifiable data for inadequacy of representation, which relate to promotions within an existing cadre, were held to be inapplicable

The court noted that the MT cadre was newly constituted and previously vacant, negating the need to assess inadequacy of representation within it

The reservation provided was also in accordance with the applicable Government of India policy

Regarding the challenge to year-wise examinations and the application of MTRR, 2013, the court observed that the MTRR, 2013, which superseded earlier rules, was in force at the time of the impugned notification, and its validity was not challenged

Rule 5 of the 2013 Rules granted discretion to BSNL to determine recruitment based on company needs, implying no statutory mandate for year-wise examinations

The court further applied the principle of estoppel, holding that the applicant in OA No. 1526/2021, having participated in the selection process without objection and being unsuccessful, was barred from challenging the notification

It also noted that interfering at this advanced stage, after selection and training, would prejudice selected candidates and unsettle vested rights

The court found Y.V. Rangaiah's principle inapplicable as the recruitment process was initiated under newly applicable rules after earlier ones were superseded, and no enforceable right under the older rules was demonstrated

The contentious notification dated 11.12.2018 was found to be in accordance with the governing Recruitment Rules (MTRR, 2013) and applicable policy

The court affirmed that the reservation for SC/ST was valid as the MT cadre was a distinct, newly constituted cadre, making the M. Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh principles on quantifiable data for promotions within existing cadres inapplicable

It was also held that the applicants were estopped from challenging the notification after participating in the selection process

Furthermore, the court found no statutory requirement for year-wise examinations, concluding that the decision to conduct a consolidated examination under the MTRR, 2013 was within BSNL's discretion

No order as to costs was made