I.S. Tiwana, J. - (1.) These three Latter Patent Appeals Nos. 406, 369 and 209 of 1983 by the three respondents in the writ petition are directed against the same judgment and are thus being disposed of together. In order to appreciate the controversy raised, the following facts deserve to be noticed.
(2.) Petitioner (now respondent) Harnek Singh Randev and Kehar Singh (now one of the appellants) were members of the Punjab Forest Service Class II. The latter was senior to the former on account of his confirmation a day earlier, that is, on Oct. 5, 1964. Later both of them became members of the newly constituted Indian Forest Service w.e.f. Oct. 1, 1966. The petitioner has now successfully challenged the appointment of this appellant to that service with effect from that date.
(3.) Indian Forest Service was constituted in pursuance of the provisions of section 2-A of the All India Services Act, 1951 (61 of 1951) with effect from July 1, 1966, i. e., with the enforcement of (Fixation of Cadre Strength) Regulations, 1966. In exercise of the powers under section 3 of the Act, the Central Government framed the Rules known as Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Recruitment Rules). In terms of Rule 4 (1) of these Rules, the Central Government further made regulations known as Indian Forest Service (Initial Recruitment) Regulation, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations). In accordance with these Rules and Regulations, a special Selection Board was constituted for selecting and appointing officers to the Punjab Cadre of I. F. S. with effect from Oct. 1, 1966, that is, prior to the reorganisation of the erstwhile State of Punjab (November 1, 1966) vide Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966. This Selection Board met in Oct. 1966 and adjudged 24 officers other than the petitioner and Kehar Singh appellant, as suitable for appointment to the State Cadre of the I. F. S. It appears that during this selection the Board observed that in so me cases adverse entries in the service record of the members of the State Service had not been communicated to them and on that account those officers could not be adjudged as suitable for appointment to I.F.S. The State Government was advised to communicate the un-communicated adverse entries in the charactor rolls of the officers concerned. It was also observed by the Board that in case the State Government decided to modify or tone down any of these entries it would recommend to the Government of India for the reconstitution of a Special Selection Board for consideration of the cases of those officers.;