- (1.) The petitioners are officers in the Forest Department of the State of Bihar and have claimed promotion to the Indian Forest Service. There is also a prayer for quashing the notification (Annexure 10 to the Writ application) whereby respondents 5 and 6 have 'been included in that Service.
(2.) The petitioners were appointed Forest Rangers on 3-4-1951. Their case is that by a memorandum dated the 20th January, 1961 of the Revenue Department (Annexure 1 to the writ application), 17 posts of Junior Forest Officers were created in the Bihar Forest Service. On the 7th August, 1964, the petitioners were promoted to the Bihar Junior Forest Service by a notification (Annexure 2 to the writ application). On the 26th April, 1973, the petitioners were further promoted to the posts of Assistant Conservator of Forests by the notification, as contained in Annexure 4 to the writ application. The Indian Forest Service was constituted under the provisions of the All India Service Act, 1951 and the petitioners, by virtue of being members of the Bihar Forest Service, were eligible for being promoted to the Indian Forest Service, but under erroneous interpretation of the law, they were held to be ineligible. They unsuccessfully represented in the matter. Ignoring the claim of the petitioners, the Respondents 5 and 6 were promoted, which necessitated the filing of the present writ application.
(3.) The All India Services Act was enacted in 1951 for regulating the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to the All India Service common to the Union and States. In 1963, provision was made by the amendment of the Act for constitution of the India Forest Service. Section 3 of the Act provided for rules to be made by the Central Government after consultation with the State Government for regulation of recruitment and conditions of service. Accordingly, the Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 were framed and came into force with effect from 1-7-1966. They will be referred to hereinafter as 'the Rules'. The term 'Service' in the rules means the Indian Forest Service, as indicated in S. 2 (d). The 'State Forest Service' has been defined in S. 2 (g) which provision has been the subject-matter of great controversy in the present case. The relevant portion of the definition is quoted below: "2. DefinitionsIn these rules, unless the context otherwise requires, (g) "State Forest Service" means: (i) any such service in a State being a service connected with forestry and the member thereof having gazetted status, as the Central Government may, in consultation with the State Government, approve for the purposes of these rules; or (ii) any service in such Central Civil Post, Class I or Class II, connected with forestry, as may be approved by the Central Government for the purposes of these rules." The R. 3 dealing with the constitution of the Service said that the Service should consist of (a) Members of the State Forest Service recruited to the Service at its initial cobstitution in accordance with the provisions of sub-r. (1) of R. 4, and (b) persons recruited to the Service in accordance with the provisions of sub- rr. (2) to (4) of R. 4. Regulations were made under R. 4 (1) for the initial recruitment to the Service, but that has nothing to do with the present case. Clause (b) of sub-r. (2) of R. 4 provided for promotion of substantive members of the State Forest Service to the Indian Forest Service. The appointment to the Service by direct recruitment is dealt with in R. 7 and regulations were made thereunder in 1967. We are not concerned with those regulations also in this case. What is relevant in the present case are the regulations framed under R.8, for the purpose of recruitment by promotion from amongst the substantive members of the State Forest Service. These regulations were also framed in 1966 and came into force with effect from 1-7-1966 and are called the Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966. The interpretations of some of the provisions of these regulations have been attempted by the parties differently and they will be referred as 'the Regulations' for brevity. The original Regulation 4 of the Regulations dealing with the promotion was repealed in 1972 and was replaced by a new regulation. The relevant portion of the regulation which held the field at the time when the petitioners, according to their case, should have been considered for promotion to the Indian Forest Service was in the following terms: "5. Conditions of eligibility for promotion (1) Each Committee shall ordinarily meet at intervals not exceeding one year and prepare a list of such members of the State Forest Service as are held by them to be suitable for promotion to the Service. The number of members of the State Forest 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 R. 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, whichever is greater. (2) The Committee shall consider for. inclusion in the said list, the cases of members of State Forest Service in order of seniority in the State Forest Service upto a num'ber not less than five time's the number referred to in sub-regulation (1): Provided that: (i) in computing the number for inclusion in the field of consideration, the number of officers referred to in sub-re-gulation (3) shall be excluded; (ii) the Committee shall not consider the case of a member of the State Forest Service unless on the first day of January of the year in. which it meets, he is substantive in the State Forest Service and has completed not less than eight years of continuous service (whether officiating or substantive) in a post of Assistant Conservator of Forests or any other post or posts declared equivalent thereto by the. State. Government with the prior concurrence of the Central Government in posts included in the State Forest Service." While preparing the list of the members of the State Forest Service suitable for promotion, the Committee did not consider the petitioners as eligible. Representations were made by officers similarly situated as the petitioners, but their grievance was not redressed. By Annexure 10, the respondents 5 and 6 were promoted on, probation to the Indian Forest Service. This writ application was thereafter filed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing . the. Union of India, respondent No. 1, State of Bihar, respondent No. 2 Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission, Respondent No. 3, and the Chief Conservator of Forests, Bihar, Respondent No. 4 for considering the petitioners as well as other officers of the Bihar Judicial Service for promotion to the Indian Forest Service and for quashing the order as contained in Annexure 10.;