- (1.) The appellant was directly recruited to the post of District Superintendent of Police in the competitive examination conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in the year 1965. He joined service on 5-7-1965. At the relevant time he was officiating as Superintendent of Police which is a post in the Indian Police Service. He was so officiating from 26-6-1975 to 5-5-1978. The substantive post held by him at the material time was of Additional Superintendent of Police which is in the State Police Service.
(2.) The dispute in the present case relates to the year in which the name of the appellant should have been included in the select list for appointment as Superintendent of Police. The name of the appellant was included, for the first time, in the select list prepared for the year 1978. According to the appellant, he should have been included in the select list which was prepared in the year 1977.
(3.) Under Regulation 5 of the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 it is provided as follows: "Regulation 5:Preparation of a list of suitable officers. (i) Each Committee shall ordinarily meet at interval not exceeding one year and prepare a list of such members of the State Police Service as are held by them to be suitable for promotion to the service. The number of members of the State Police Service included in the list shall not be more than twice the number of substantive vacancies anticipated in the course of the period of twelve months, commencing from the date of preparation of the list in the posts available for them under Rule 9 of the Recruitment Rules; OR 10 per cent of the senior posts shown against items 1 and 2 of the cadre schedule of each State or Group of States, which is greater. ;