P.N. Dubey & Ors Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh  INSC 135 (6 February
RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD
O R D
This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court, Jabalpur Bench, made on February 10, 1981 in Miscellaneous Petition No.
812/80. The appellants were working as Veterinary Assistant Surgeons in the
Madhya Pradesh Veterinary Services Gazetted. The Madhya Pradesh Veterinary
Services is governed by the rules called Madhya Pradesh Services (Gazetted)
Recruitment Rules, 1966.
channel of recruitment to the post of Assistant Director Veterinary Service was
from two sources, namely, direct recruitment and promotion in the proportion of
one is to one. An advertisement came to be made by the Madhya Pradesh Public
Service Commission of 28 posts of Assistant Directors. The appellants had
challenged the validity of the Notification and selection on the ground that
the Government had, by then decided, to provide recruitment to the post of Assistant
Directors by promotion with 100% from the feeder cadre, namely, Veterinary
Assistant Surgeon. It is found, as a fact, by the High Court that as on the
date of the notification, the rules were not amended. Unamended Rules provide
that the recruitment was to be made from two sources, namely, direct
recruitment and by promotion at a ratio of one is to one. Consequently, the
advertisement for recruitment of Assistant and by promotion at a ratio of one
is to one. Consequently, the advertisement for recruitment of Assistant
Directors by the Public Service Commission and Selection and appointment of the
challenged in this appeal.
seen that undoubtedly though decision was taken by the Government, the Rules
have not been amended. Therefore, the advertisement made for recruitment of
fill up the posts of Assistant Directors, by direct recruitment and
consequential selection as per the unamended Rules for the 50% of the vacancies
earmarked for direct recruitment was in accordance with the aforesaid Rules. As
a consequence, the view taken by the High Court is consistent with the Rules.
We do not find any illegality warranting interference.
appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.