9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (2) TMI 325X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eers Class I Public Works Department (Public Health Branch) Rules 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). In 1971 the appellants were promoted to the post of Executive Engineers in the cadre of Class I on ad-hoc basis while Vyas Dev respondent was not considered for promotion. He made representation but nothing came out in his favour. Later a Committee was constituted under Rule 8 for selecting suitable members of Class II service for promotion to Class I post. The Committee considered the case of appellants and Vyas Dev respondent, but it did not find the respondent suitable for promotion, his name was not included in the select list prepared by the Committee while the names of the appellants were included therein. The Selection Committee's recommendation was approved by the Public Service Commission and it was forwarded to the State Government. Since the appellants did not possess the requisite minimum period of service of eight years' in Class II service as required by Rule 6(b) and as no other suitable candidates were available, the Selection Committee made recommendation to the State Government for granting relaxation to the appellants. The Committee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy in service of the State Government or of the Union Government, or by promotion from Class II Service. Rule 6 prescribes qualifications for appointment to Class I service. The relevant provisions of the Rule are as under: 6. Qualifications: No person shall be appointed to the service, unless he: (a) possesses one of the University Degree or other qualifications prescribed in Appendix 8 of these rules: Provided that Government may waive this qualification in the case of particular officer belonging to Class II Service: (b) in the case of an appointment by promotion from Class II Service, has eight years completed Class II and has passed the professional examination of the department.... Rule 8 provides for Constitution of the Committee for making selection for appointment to Class I service by promotion. The Committee is required to prepare a list of officers suitable for promotion on the basis of the criteria of merit and suitability with due regard to seniority. Rule 9 lays down, field of eligibility as well as criteria for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer, Superintending Engineer and Chief Engineer. Rule 15 provides for departmental examinations, according t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lar case" does not mean that the relaxation should be confined only to an individual case. One of the meanings of the expression "particular" means "peculiar or pertaining to a specified person-thing-time or place-not common or general". The meaning of the word particular in relation to law means separate or special, limited or specific. The word 'case' in ordinary usage means 'event', 'happening', 'situation', circumstances'. The expression 'case' in legal sense means 'a case', suit' or "proceeding in Court or Tribunal'. Having regard to these meanings the expression in any particular case' would mean; in a particular or pertaining to an event, situation or circumstance. Rule 22 postulates relaxation or Rules to meet a particular event or situation, if the operation of the Rules causes hardship. The relaxation of the Rules may be to the extent the State Government may consider necessary for dealing with a particular situation in a just and equitable manner. The scope of Rule is wide enough to confer power on the State Government to relax the requirement of Rules in respect of an individual or class of individuals to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ale expansion of Engineering Department a number of posts in Class I service were lying vacant. A similar situation prevailed in the Building and Road Branch of Public Works Department. In the circumstances, the State Government with a view to meet the particular situation decided to relax the qualifying length of service to such officers who had completed four years of service in Class II, it therefore relaxed the requirement of Rule 6(b) to the extent that a member of Class II service having four years' service was qualified for being considered for promotion to Class I service. These facts would clearly show that the relaxation had been granted to particular individuals with a view to meet the situation, which was in public interest. We find no legal infirmity in the order of relaxation. 8. In B.S. Bansal v. State of Punjab and Ors., [1978] 2 SLR 553 a Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that if the power of relaxation could be exercised in order to meet a general situation, then the whole purpose of the Rule would be frustrated and the Government would be armed with an arbitrary power which could cause great hardship to some officers. We have already referred t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther as they had not completed six years' of continuous service prior to the respondents, they were not entitled to any relief. The appeal was accordingly dismissed by this Court. While considering the question of validity of relaxation, the Court made observation that Rule 14 did not permit any general relaxation of the nature ordered by the State Government. The Court, however, did not examine the matter in detail as it was of the view that since the appellants in that case were not eligible for promotion they could not question the validity of the appointment of those who had been promoted on the basis of relaxation being granted by the State Government. The Court upheld the promotions in view of the extra ordinary situation in which the State Government made appointments in derogation of requirement of Rules. 10. On a careful scrutiny of the Rules in its various aspects we do not agree with the observations made in Jit Singh's case (supra). Though Rule 22 is not happily worded, as apparently it gives an impression that no general relaxation can be granted by the State Government, out on a close scrutiny of the scope of the power we find that a narrow construction of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the State Government. 11. In Bansal's case (supra) the High Court, and even in Jit Singh's case (supra) this Court did not set aside the promotions made by the Government pursuant to relaxation of Rules on the ground that the petitioner who challenged the promotions was himself not qualified, and he had no legal right to hold the post in dispute, although in both these cases Government's order granting general relaxation was held to be outside the scope of Rule 22 and Rule 14 of the Punjab Police Service Rules 1959. In the instant case the High Court has set aside the appellants' promotions following Bansal's case interpreting Rule 22 but it failed to notice that in that case the High Court did not set aside the promotions instead it dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner therein was not qualified and none of his rights were affected. The High Court failed to notice that Vyas Dev respondent was considered for promotion but he was not found suitable, therefore he was not entitled to any relief. Since no legal right of the respondent was adversely affected the High Court should not have quashed the appellants' promotions. 12. On behalf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
