- (1.) In this appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent constitutional validity of Rules 6 and 7 of the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules, 1930 (hereinafter called the Rules), has been challenged on the grounds that the said rules allow the names of Tehsildars to be considered along with those of Naib-Tehsildars, who are inferior in rank, and that the powers vested in the Financial Commissioners to send ud names are arbitrary.
(2.) The appellant took the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) Competitive Examination in the year 1963 and was selected for direct appointment to the post of a Tehsildar. He was appointed to this post on July 20, 1964. According to him, his work and conduct throughout has been satisfactory.
(3.) For the two vacancies out of the quota of Tehsildars and Naib-Tehsildars for promotion to the P. C. S. (Executive Branch), which occurred in 1964, the following four names were sent: 1. Shri Jasmer Singh, Tehsildar, Bhatinda. 2. Shri Harnam Singh, Tehsildar. 3. Shri Bansi Lal Sikka, Naib-Tehsildar, Abohar. 4. Shri Hardeep Singh Sandhu, Tehsildar, Wakf Board. For the vacancies which occurred in the year 1971, the following officers were recommended: 1. Shri Madan Mohan. 2. Shri Harjinder Singh. 3. Shri Bansi Lal Sikka. 4. Shri G. C. Jain, Tehsildar. Faridkot. 5. Shri Davinder Singh, Tehsildar. The appellant made a grievance that out of the second list except Shri G. C. Jain, all the persons recommended were junior to him, but at the motion stage the writ petition was admitted qua respondents Nos. 1 to 4 only and dismissed qua respondents Nos. 5 to 8.;