V.S.SIRPURKAR, J. - (1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of four Civil Appeals, they being Civil Appeal Nos.1041-1044 of 2004, all of which have been filed by the present appellant.
(2.) THE appellant who is an employee of the Forest Department of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands comes before us in the above appeals challenging a common judgment passed by the High Court in two writ petitions whereby the judgment in favour of the writ petitioner passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal" for short) was upset allowing the writ petitions. THE appellant has also challenged the further orders passed by the High Court dismissing the Review Petitions filed by the appellant. THE High Court vide its judgment set aside the order of the Tribunal and allowed two writ petitions, one filed by the State Cadre Forest Officers Association and another by the Andaman and Nicobar Administration. THEy were W.P. C.T.No.209 of 1999 and W.P.C.T.No.246 of 1999. THE judgment of the Tribunal was itself passed in review whereby the Review Petition filed by the appellant was allowed and the earlier judgment passed by the Tribunal was upset and the Original Application filed by the appellant was allowed. THE following facts would be necessary to understand the controversy involved. The appellant, at the relevant time when he approached the Tribunal, was holding the post of Assistant Mill Manager (hereinafter referred to as "AMM" for short) in the Forest Department of Andaman. The Service Profile of the appellant is as under: "He started his service as a Casual Labour on 12.7.1976. He was appointed as Draftsman on adhoc basis on 20.7.1976 and thereafter as Assistant Constructional Engineer w.e.f. 26.12.1980 and was posted in Saw Mill Division, Chatham where he continued till March, 1984 in that capacity. In March, on the basis of the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee for Group B post, he was promoted as Assistant Mill Manager, Saw Mill Division vide notification dated 16.3.1984. His claim is that thereafter he was posted to supervise the construction work at Rangat and Rangat Bay. He further claimed that he was assigned the duty of supervision and inspection of the Saw Mill at Betapur. He also claimed that he was also directed to exercise the powers and authority of Assistant Conservator of Forest though at intervals. Thus he continued to be posted at Rangat, Middle Andamans as Assistant Mill Manager from July, 1984 to June, 1992 during which period he had also been assigned the duties of Assistant Conservator of Forest from time to time. He, therefore, claims that he enjoyed the same power and authority of Assistant Conservator of Forest and for this he relied on an order dated 9.12.1993." When the petitioner was appointed initially, he was part of the Forest Department of Andaman and Nicobar Islands governed by Andaman Forest Department (Class I and Class II Gazetted Posts) Recruitment Rules, 1963 (hereafter referred to as "the 1963 Rules") which were amended on 3.8.1973. Both these Rules provide for the recruitment and promotion to the posts of Chief Conservator of Forests, Conservator of Forests, Deputy Conservator of Forests, Assistant Conservator of Forests, Assistant Mill Manager, Senior Assistant Engineer and others. The claim of the appellant, as it originally stood, was that in terms of the aforementioned Rules, he deserved to be promoted to the post of Deputy Conservator of Forests (hereinafter referred to as "DCF" for short). The basis of this claim was that his post of AMM was equivalent in Grade-II to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests (hereinafter referred to as the "ACF" for short) which was a feeder post for the promotion to the post of DCF. His further case was that as per the Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966 [hereafter referred to as the "IFS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966] dated 17.11.1965 he was entitled to be promoted to the post of DCF on the basis of Sub Rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 [hereinafter referred to as the "IFS (Recruitment) Rules, 1966]. The 1963 Rules, as they initially stood, provided that there were in all seven posts of DCF in the pay-scale of Rs.740-1150-1250. Column 10 thereof provides "that the recruitment would be by promotion, failing which by deputation. For promotion it was provided that it would be from the Assistant Conservator of Forests of the Andamans Forest Department or officers holding posts in an equivalent grade in the Adamans Forest Department with not less than 5 years service in the grade". The other mode of recruitment was deputation with which we are not concerned. At Serial No.4 is the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests. The Rules suggest that there are nine posts which were Class-II gazetted non-ministerial posts carrying the pay-scale of Rs.350-25-500-30- 590-EB-30-800-EB-30-830-35-900. Column 7 which provides the qualifications reads as under: "Essential: Associateship Diploma of the Forest Research Institute and Colleges, Dehradun or equivalent. Candidates selected for training at Dehradun will be required to possess the following educational qualifications: Degree in Natural Science, Maths, Geology, Mechanical Engineering or Agriculture of recognized University or equivalent qualification." In so far as the post of AMM is concerned, it appears at Serial No.5, which is also a Class-II Gazetted non-ministerial post carrying the pay-scale of Rs.350-25-500-30-590-EB-30-800-EB-30-800 if the post if filled by the direct recruitment. However, the pay-scale is different in case this post is filled in by ACF which pay-scale is identical with the ACF pay-scale which we have quoted earlier, meaning thereby the AMM post had a slightly lower pay-scale as compared to the post of ACF. Column No.7 which provides the qualification for the post of AMM is as under: "Essential: Experience of timber trade and sawing practice for about five years. Qualifications relaxable at Commission's discretion in case of candidates otherwise well qualified. Desirable: A degree in Engineering or Science." These Rules underwent a slight change when they were amended in 1973. The 1973 amendment changed the Schedule in so far as the requirements (educational qualifications, etc.) for the post of ACF and AMM are concerned. Now the essential qualifications required for the post of ACF were as under: "At least 2nd class degree in Natural Sciences, Mathematics, Statistics, Geology, Mechanical Engineering, Civil or Chemical Engineering, Agriculture or Economics of a recognized University or equivalent. Graduate in pure Mathematics, Statistics, must have had biology, physics or chemistry as a subject in Higher Secondary or Matriculation or equivalent." We are not concerned with the other essential qualifications which pertain to physique, etc. We must, however, know that these were the essential qualifications for the post of ACF. The pay-scale also remained identical. Now, for the first time, the "essential" qualification was provided for the post of AMM which was as under: "Essential: (i) A degree in Civil, Mechanical or Chemical Engineering or Master's degree in Chemistry or recognized university or equivalent, (ii) 3 years experience of timber or sawing practice or both in total. (Qualification relaxable at the discretion of the UPSC in case of candidates otherwise well qualified). The pay-scale was now increased and it was Rs.350-25-500-590-EB- 30-830-35-900, which is identical to the post of ACF. However, it was provided that if the ACF was appointed in the post of AMM, he would draw his grade's pay. There was also amendment in respect of the recruitment of both these posts. The relevant columns in respect of both the posts, i.e., ACF and AMM at the time of 1963 Rules and at the time of amendment in 1973 are given below in juxtaposition: JUDGEMENT_711_TLPRE0_2007Html1.htm
(3.) ON the basis of these Rules, it was contended by the appellant before the Tribunal that particularly after the amendment in 1973 the post of AMM became equivalent to that of ACF. The 1963 Rules as well as 1973 Rules were still in vogue and, therefore, there was a channel for promotion to the post of DCF from the post of ACF as was originally provided and now from the post of an equivalent grade. Since the 1973 the post of AMM became equivalent to the post of ACF and, therefore, he was also bound to be considered for promotion to the post of DCF as per the 1963 Rules as amended in 1973. The appellant also relied upon the Gradation Lists from which the appellant sought to read the equivalence of his post to the post of ACF. In his Original Application, the appellant also mentioned the new Recruitment Rules, viz., Andaman and Nicobar Forest Service Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the "1991 Rules") issued on 25.7.1991 constituting a central service to be known as the Andaman and Nicobar Islands Forest Service with two grades, namely, Time Scale and Selection Grade. The selection grade was put under Central Civil Grade A and the Time Scale in Central Civil Grade B. According to these Rules all the ACFs working in the Andaman and Nicobar Forest Service were to be placed in either of the above two grades. These Rules excluded all other State Forest Service Grade B officers except ACF. He complained against the position that for constitution of the new service the cases of only ACFs were to be submitted to UPSC excluding all other grades under Andaman and Nicobar Forest Service Grade B Officers. He claimed that he made the representations to this effect, but the same was rejected. On these contentions he finally claimed that he was eligible firstly according to the Recruitment Rules of 1963/1973 for promotion to the grade of DCF and was also eligible for inclusion in the list of officers of the Andaman Forest Service for appointment on promotion to the post of DCF specified in Schedule of Rule 5 of IFS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966.;