RAMASWAMI, - (1.) THE following Judgment of the court was delivered by: :
(2.) THIS appeal is brought, by certificate, from the judgment of the High court of Punjab dated 11/03/1964 dismissing the Writ petition of the appellant Civil Writ No. 189-D of 1962. In his petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the appellant, S. G. Jaisinghani, challenged the constitutional validity of what has been described as the 'seniority rule' in regard to Income-tax Service, Class 1, Grade 11 along with the improper implementation of the 'quota' recruitment to that Service as infringing the guarantee of Arts. 14 and 16(i) of the Constitution. The original respondents to the petition were the Union of India, secretary to the government of India in the Ministry of Finance and the central Board of Revenue-respondents 1 to 3. Subsequently, respondents 4 to 126 were added and those are promotees in the Income-Tax Service who will be affected by the result of the petition. In order to improve the Income Tax administration the government of India, on 29/09/1944, reconstituted and classified the existing Income-Tax Services as Class 1 and 11. The re-organisational scheme provided for recruitment of Income-Tax Officers, Class I Grade 11 Service partly by promotion and partly by direct recruitment. The re-organisational scheme was set out in government of India, Finance Department (Central Revenues) letter dated 29/09/1944 (Ex. B). It created two classes of Income-Tax Service, Class I with Grade I and Grade 11 and Class 11 Service with Grade 111. Recruitment to Class I Grade 11 Service was to be made : (a) by direct recruitment through a competitive examination, and (b) by promotion from Class It Grade III, the ratio prescribed in paragraph 2(d) of the letter being 80% by direct recruitment and 20% by promotion from Class 11 Grade III Service, and in case sufficient number of suitable candidates was not available for promotion, surplus vacancies would be filled by direct recruitment. In government of India, Ministry of Finance (Revenue Division) letter dated 24/01/1950 (Ex. G to the writ petition), the rules of seniority were laid down. These rules laid down-the principle for determination of seniority (a) as between direct recruits recruited on the result of the combined competitive examination; (b) as between promotees selected from Class 11 and (c) as between the direct recruits who complete their probation in a given year and the promotees in the same year for appointment to Class 1. These rules were revised on 5/09/1952 by the government of India, Ministry of Finance, Revenue Division, letter No. F. No. 58(3)-Ad. IT150, dated 5/09/1952. The relevant rule, viz., rule I (f) as framed in 1950 was as follows 'The seniority of direct recuits recruited on the results of the examinations held by the Federal Public 'Service Commission in 1944, and subsequent years shall be reckoned as follows :- (i) Direct recruits of an earlier examination shall rank above those recruited from subsequent examination. (ii) Direct recruits of any one examination shall rank inter se-, in accordance with the ranks obtained by them at that examination. (iii) The promotees who have been certified by the Commission in any calendar year shall be senior to all direct recruits who complete their probation during that year or after and are confirmed with effect from a date in that year or after. Provided that a person initially recruited as Class 11 Income-tax Officer, but subsequently appointed to Class I on the results of a competitive examination conducted by the Federal public service commission shall if he has passed the departmental examination held before his appointment to Class I Service, be deemed to be promotee for the purpose of seniority.' The rule, as revised in, 1952 was to the following effect. 'The seniority of direct recruits recruited on the results of the examinations held by the Federal public service commission in 1944, and subsequent years shall be reckoned as follows (i) Direct recruits of an earlier examination shall rank above those recruited from a subsequentexamination. (ii) Direct recruits of any one examination shall rank inter se in accordance with the ranks obtained by them at that examination; (iii) Officers promoted in accordance with the recommendation of the,' Departmental Promotion Committee before the next meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee shall be senior to all direct recruits appointed on the results of the examinations held by the Union public service commission during the calendar year in which the Departmental Promotion Committee met and the three previous years. (iii) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (iii).a Class 11 Income-tax Officer subsequently appointed to Class I on the results of a Competitive Examination conducted by the Federal public service commission shall, if he has passed the Departmental Examination held before his appointment to Class I Service be deemed to be a promotee for the purpose of seniority.' Clause (iv) of the 1952 Rule is almost a reproduction of the proviso to clause (iii) of the rule framed in 1950 and clause (iii) has been recast in somewhat different language, though in substance it contains what the main body of clause (iii) of the Rule of 1950 stated. The effect of clause (iii) of 1952 Rule is that the promotee becomes senior to the direct recruit who has completed a probationary period of two years in the very year in which the Departmental Promotion Committee meets recommending the officers in Class 11 for promotion to Class 1. The following illustrations clarify the application of the rule Illustration 'A' JUDGEMENT_1427_AIR(SC)_1967Html1.htm Illustration 'B' JUDGEMENT_1427_AIR(SC)_1967Html2.htm
(3.) A Class 11 Officer when directly recruited had to be on probation for two years during which period he had to undergo a course of theoretical and practical training and should pass a departmental examination for being confirmed. After a minimum period of thee years of work as Income-tax Officer (after his probation of two yea rs) he is considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee for promotion to Class 1. That is to say that he has to have a minimum service of 5 years in all in Class II before he is qualified for being considered for promotion to Class I, Grade 11 Service. Clause (iv) of rule 1(f) deals with a special situation in which an officer initially appointed to Class 11 Service is given seniority in the same manner as a departmental promotee if subsequent to his passing the departmental examination in Class 11 he is appointed to Class I on the results of the combined competitive examination held by the Union public service commission. On 18/10/1951 the recruitment quotas of 80'/ and 20% under the re-organisation scheme dated 29/09/1944 were revised. Under the revised recruitment quota rule 66- 2/3% of the vacancies in Grade 11 Class I would be filled by direct recruitment and the remaining 33-1/3% by promotion from Grade III Class 11 Service. Any surplus vacancies which could not be filled by promotion for want of suitable candidates were to be added to the quota of vacancies to be filled by direct recruitment.f;