# 2:1.3 RARKISHAN SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

- **Citation:** [1971] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 223
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1971-03-25
- **Bench:** C. A. Vaidialingam, A. N. Ray
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/2-1-3-rarkishan-singh-v-state-of-punjab-ors-5516
- **Pages:** 7

## Headnote

Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, rr. 2(c) 5 and 9(3)-Direct recruitment to Selection Gradel/ permitted by rules-Fixation of seniority in absence of rules.
The appellant and the third respondent were members of the Punjab
A
B
Civil Medical Service, Class I.
The second Respondent, who was serv·
C
ing abroad, was offered the post of Civil Surgeon in the Punjab Civil
Medical Service and he joined the post of Chief Medical Officer in the
Punjab Civil Medical Service, Class I, temporarily. Applications for fill·
ing up the post permanently were invited through the Public Service Com·
mission, and the second respondent was selected and appointed. Thereaiter,
he was appointed in the Selection Grade of the Punjab Civil Medical Service.
Ten day• later, the appellant and the third respondent were also appointed
to the selection Grade.
D
The appellant impeached the second respondent's appointment to the
Selection Grade on two grounds: (I) that the appointment to the Selection
Grade could only he by promotion from Punjab Civil Medical Service,
Oass I, and not by direct appointment; and (2) even if the second respondent could be appointed direct to the Selection Grade his seniority should
be below that of the appellant and the third respondent, on the ground
E
Jhat the appellant and the dlird respondent were senior to the second respondent in the time scale of Class I Service.
HI:LD: (I) The Service as defined in r. 2(c) of the Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I (Recruitment and conditions of Service) Rules, means
the Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I and the Selection Grade is a part
and parcel of the Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I. Therefore, when
F
r. 5 specifically speaks of appointment to the Service by direct recruitment
it embraces both Class I and the Selection Grade. The word appointment
means both by promotion and by direct recruitment and is used in that
sense in relation to the selection grade in r. S and in relation to the total
number of appointments to the service in r. 9(3).
Direct appointment
to Selection Grade is not only contemplated in rr. 5 anll 9(3) but is also
implicit in them.
Further, the rules contemplate direct appointment to
Selection Grade in proper cases when there are no suitable persons in
G
Class I time scale who can be promoted to the Selection Grade.
(226!-; 2288-F]
(2) The second respondent's appointment to the post of Chief Medical
Officer was in consultation with the Punjab Public Service Commission as
contemplated by r. 3, but the seniority list of the Class I service to which
the appellant and the respondeqts belonged was not fixed.
Where there
are no specific rules in regard to the fixation of seniority in the Selection
H
Grade in the case of direct appointment, the second respondent, having
been recruited earlier than the appellant and the third respondent, his
seniority should not be disturbed.
[:1.28G; 229CFJ
\
224
SUPl\l!ME COURT l\l!l'ORTS
(1971] SUPP. s.c.a.
A
CivIL APPELLATE JUIUSDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 430 of
1970.
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated
August 13, 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in
L.P.A. No. 288 of 1968.
Jagjit Singh Chawla, K. L. Mehta and S. K. Mehta, for
the appellant.
H. L. Sibbal, Advocate-General, Punjab and R. N. Sachthey
for respondent No. I.
V. C. Mahajan, S. S. Khanduja and V. P. Kohlo, for respondent No. 2.

## Text

.2:1.3
RARKISHAN SINGH
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
March 25, 1971
[C. A. VAIDIALINGAM AND A. N. RAY, JJ.J
Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I (Recruitment and Conditions of
Service) Rules, rr. 2(c) 5 and 9(3)-Direct recruitment to Selection Gradel/ permitted by rules-Fixation of seniority in absence of rules.
The appellant and the third respondent were members of the Punjab
A
B
Civil Medical Service, Class I.
The second Respondent, who was serv·
C
ing abroad, was offered the post of Civil Surgeon in the Punjab Civil
Medical Service and he joined the post of Chief Medical Officer in the
Punjab Civil Medical Service, Class I, temporarily. Applications for fill·
ing up the post permanently were invited through the Public Service Com·
mission, and the second respondent was selected and appointed. Thereaiter,
he was appointed in the Selection Grade of the Punjab Civil Medical Service.
Ten day• later, the appellant and the third respondent were also appointed
to the selection Grade.
D
The appellant impeached the second respondent's appointment to the
Selection Grade on two grounds: (I) that the appointment to the Selection
Grade could only he by promotion from Punjab Civil Medical Service,
Oass I, and not by direct appointment; and (2) even if the second respondent could be appointed direct to the Selection Grade his seniority should
be below that of the appellant and the third respondent, on the ground
E
Jhat the appellant and the dlird respondent were senior to the second respondent in the time scale of Class I Service.
HI:LD: (I) The Service as defined in r. 2(c) of the Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I (Recruitment and conditions of Service) Rules, means
the Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I and the Selection Grade is a part
and parcel of the Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I. Therefore, when
F
r. 5 specifically speaks of appointment to the Service by direct recruitment
it embraces both Class I and the Selection Grade. The word appointment
means both by promotion and by direct recruitment and is used in that
sense in relation to the selection grade in r. S and in relation to the total
number of appointments to the service in r. 9(3).
Direct appointment
to Selection Grade is not only contemplated in rr. 5 anll 9(3) but is also
implicit in them.
Further, the rules contemplate direct appointment to
Selection Grade in proper cases when there are no suitable persons in
G
Class I time scale who can be promoted to the Selection Grade.
(226!-; 2288-F]
(2) The second respondent's appointment to the post of Chief Medical
Officer was in consultation with the Punjab Public Service Commission as
contemplated by r. 3, but the seniority list of the Class I service to which
the appellant and the respondeqts belonged was not fixed.
Where there
are no specific rules in regard to the fixation of seniority in the Selection
H
Grade in the case of direct appointment, the second respondent, having
been recruited earlier than the appellant and the third respondent, his
seniority should not be disturbed.
[:1.28G; 229CFJ
\
224
SUPl\l!ME COURT l\l!l'ORTS
(1971] SUPP. s.c.a.
A
CivIL APPELLATE JUIUSDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 430 of
1970.
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated
August 13, 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in
L.P.A. No. 288 of 1968.
Jagjit Singh Chawla, K. L. Mehta and S. K. Mehta, for
the appellant.
H. L. Sibbal, Advocate-General, Punjab and R. N. Sachthey
for respondent No. I.
V. C. Mahajan, S. S. Khanduja and V. P. Kohlo, for respondent No. 2.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Ray, J.-This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment dated 13 August, 1969 of the High Court of Punjab and
Haryana.
The appellant was appointed and confirmed in Punjab Civil
Medical Service Class I with effect from 26 February,
1955.
Respondent No. 3 Dr. S. S. Sekhon was confirmed in the same
Class I service on 28 February, 1955. The time scale salary of
Class I service is Rs. 60040-8()().50-900 with efficiency bar at
800 /-.
A class I officer on promotion to the selection grade is
entitled to Rs. 1000 /-.
Dr. Pritam Singh is a Fellow of the Royal College of
Surgeons.
He obtained qualifications in various post graduate
medical courses in England and America. In 1961 he was serving the Government of Uganda in Africa at a salary of Rs. 30001p.m. in a permanent pensionable post. The Punjab Government
in the year 1961 offered him the post of Civil Surgeon in the
Punjab Civil Medical Service.
Dr. Pritam Singh expressed his
willingness to accept the post at a suitable salary.
Respondent No. 2 Dr. Pritam Singli was
appointed
on
16 July, 1962 as Chief Medical Officer in the
Punjab Civil
Medical Serviee Class I in the scale of Rs. 8()().50-1500 with a
starting salary of Rs. 1000/- p.m. with such allowances as might
be admissible under the rules.
He joined the post with effect
from 4 August, 1962. By an order of the Governor of Punjab
dated 18 December, 1962 the post was directed to be in addition
to the existing posts of Civil Surgeons both in the selection grade
and ordinary grade.
The Government of Punjab thereafter took steps of filling
the post of the Chief Medical Officer, Chandigarh on a permanent
basis through the Public Service Commission.
A public notice
HARKISHAN v. PUNJAB (Ray,/.)
inviting applications for the post was issued under the authority
of the Commission in the month of April, 1963.
Dr.. Pritam
Singh applied for the post. Neither the appellant nor respondent
Dr. Sekhon applied for the· post because they did not have the
requisite qualification prescribed 1or the post. Dr. Pritam · Singh
was selected by the Punjab Public Service C011llllission.
The
order of appointment by the Governor was issued on· JO May, 1963.
Dr. Pritam Singh was on probation for a period of two
years with effect from the date on which he joined as Chief
Medical Officer, namely, 4 August, 1962, and he was governed
by the Punjab tivi.1' Medical Service Class 1 Rules.
On 30
August, 1963 a fonnal letter was issued to Dr. Pritam Singh that
the Governor of Punjab· in consultation l;Vith the Punjab Public
Service Commission had allowed Dr. Pritam Singh the grant of
higher starting pay of Rs. 1250/· p.m. on his appointment as
Chief Medical Officer on a regular basis in the time scale of
Rs. 8()().5()..1500 with effect from 17 April, 1963 as Principal
Medical Officer, Chandigarh which was the name of the redesignated post of the Chief Medical Officer. On 9 December,
1965 Dr. Pritam Singh was confinned with effect from 17 April,
1963 as Principal Medical Officer, Chandigarh.
On 20 October, 1966 the respondent Dr. Pritam Singh was
appointed by the President of India in the selection
grade of
Punjab Civil Medical Service in the scale of Rs. 130()..5()..1600 with
effect from 20 October, 1966.
The appellant impeached the order dated 20 October, 1966
appointing the respondent Dr. Pritam Singh in the selection grade
to be in violation of the Punjab Civil Medical Service (Recruit·
ment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1940 on two broad
A
B
c
D
E
grounds ; first, that thQ appointment to t!he selection grade of
F
Punjab Civil Medical Service could be only by promotion from
Punjab Civil Medical Servic.e Class I and not by direct appointment, and, secondly, even if Dr. Pritam Singh could be appointed
direct to the selection grade his seniority would be below that of
the appellant and Dr. Sekhon.
When Dr. Pritam Singh was appointed to the selection grade
he was placed at the bolltom of the selection grade. The appellant ~nd the respondent Dr. Sekhon were also appointed to the
selection grade with effect from I November, 1966 JO days subsequent •to the appointment of Dr. Pritam Singh. The appellant
and Dr. Sekh9n contended that they had been senior to Dr. Pntam
S[ngh in the time scale of Class I Service and therefore the res·
pondent Dr. Pritam Singh should not have been placed senior to
them in the selection grade.
15-1 S.C. lndia/71
G
H
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
Slll'RBME COURT Rl!PollTS
[1971] SUPP. s.c.R.
The Punjab Civil Medical Service, Oass I (Recruitment and
Conditions of Service) Rules are 17 in number. Rule 2(c) defines
the service to mean the Punjab Civil Medical Service Class I.
Rule 3 states that all appointments to the service shall be made
by the Government on the advice of the Commission from time
to time as required. The other relevant Rules necessary for the
purpose of the present appeal are rules 5, 6, 7(1), 8 and 9 which
are as follows :-
" 5. Appointment to the serVice shall be made either by
promotion from the Class II service or by direct recruitment in India or in England and when any vacancy occurs
or is about to occur, Government shall determine in what
manner such vacancy shall be filled.
Note : Except with the previous sanction of Government only such persons shall be eligible for direct
appointment as are not already in Government service.
6. (I) The service shall consillt of such number of
posts of Civil Surgeons as may be determined by Government from time to time.
(2) Not less than nine posts shall be filled by promotion from the Class II service.
Provided that recruitment by promotion shall be
made by strict selection and no member of the Gass II
service shall have any claim to such promotions of right.
7. (!) Members of the service who are appointed
against permanent vacancies shall on appointment remain on probation for a period of two years If recruited
by direct appointment and one year if recruited otherwise
than by direct appointment.
Explanation : Officiating service shall be reckoned
as period spent on probation but no member of the ser·
vice who is officiating in any appointment shall on the
completion of his period of probation be entitled to be
confirmed until he is appointed against a permanent
vacancy.
8. The seniority of the members of the service shall
be determined by the dates of their confirmation in the
service:
Provided that if two or more members are confirm·
H
ed on the same date:
(a) A member recruited by direct appointment shall
be senior to a member recruited by promotion.
HARUSHAN V. PUNJAB (Ra)', J.)
Cb)
in the case of members who are both or all ap·
pointed by promotion from the Class II service,
seniority shall be determined according to the
seniority of those members In that service; and
(c) in all other cases Government shall decide the
seniority.
9. (I) A member of the service shall on appoint·
men! be entitled to a pay of a scale rising from Rs. 600
a month by an annual increment of Rs. 40 a month to
Rs. 800 a month and then by an annual increment of
Rs. 50 a month to Rs. 900 a month with an efficiency
bar at Rs. 800 a month. In addition a member if he is
of non-Asiatic domicile shall be entitled to receive such
overseas pay as may be prescribed by Government from
time to time.
(2) Members of -the service shall be eligible for prom.,tion to a selection grade and on such promotion shall
be entitled to a pay of Rs. 1000 a month.
Provided that promotion to the selection grade shall
be made strictly by selection and no member of the service shall be entitled as of right to such promotion.
13) The number of appointments in the selection
grade shall not exceed 25 per cent of the total number
of appointments in the service "
Counsel for the appellant contended that rule 9(21
which
· stated that the members of the service shall be eligible for promotion to the selection grade meant that only the members of Class I
service could be promoted to a selection grade and there could
be no direct appointment to a selection grade. A direct appointment to the selection grade was said by the appellant to be an
infraction of rule 9(2). The contention of the appellant with
regard to rule 5 was that it spoke of appointment to the service
either by promotion from Class II or by direct recruitment and
therefore there could be direct recruitment only to Class I service
and not to the selection grade. It was emphasised that rule 5 did
not specifically provide for direct appointment to selection grade.
Rule 9(2) does not contain any restrictive word that only
members of the service sh.all be eligible to promotion to a selec·
tion grade. The proviso to rule 9(2) contains a word of limitation
and it Is that no member of the service shall be entitled as of
right to such promotion. To exclude appointment to selection
grade would be to rob rule 5 as well as rules 9(2) and 9(3) of t\leir
content because rule 5 speaks of appointment to the service to be
227
A.
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
228
A
c
D
E
F
G
H
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1971] SUPP. s.c.R.
either by promotion or by direct recruitment.
Rule 9(2) speaks
of eligibility of members of the service for promotion to the selection grade and rule 9(3)speaks of the number of appointments in
the selection grade not to exceed 25 per cent of appointments in
the §ervice. The service as defined in rule 2(c) means the Punjab
Civil Medical Service Class I. Selection grade is the Punjab Civil
Medical Se.rvice Class I. That is not disputed.
Therefore rule
5 which specifically speaks of appointment to the service by direct
recruitment embraces Class I and the selection grade which is a
part and parcel of Class I. The word 'appointment' in rule 9(3)
in regard to selection grade as not exceeding 25 per cent of the
total number of appointments in the service contemplates both
promotion and direct appointments in the service to the selection
grade. The word "appointment" cannot mean only promotion.
It means appointment both by promotion and by direct recruitment. That Is why the word 'appointment' is used in that sense
once in relation to selection grade and again in relation to the total
number of appointments to the service. Direct appointment to
selection grade is not only contemplated in the rules particularly
rules 5, 9(2) and 9(3) but is also the implicit idea inherent in the
words "direct recruitment and direct appointment" in Rule 5 for
the purpose of attracting able and meritorious persons to the service including the selection grade. The fallacy in the appellant's
contention is that though selection grade will be within the definition of the service in rule 2(c), wherever the word "service" occurs
In rules 5 and 9, the construction put upon the words 'service' is
members of the service who are in Class I on time scale appointment and who alone can be promoted to the selection grade and
that there cannot be any direct appointment to selection grade.
There is another reason as to why the rules contemplate
direct appointment to selection grade in proper cases. If it appears
that there are not suitable persons in Class I time scale who can
be promoted to the selection grade persollll of ability will have to
be brought in to the selection grade from outside.
A contention was advanced by counsel for the appellant
that rule 3 contemplated appointment by the Government on the
adviCe of the Public Service Commission and that the appointment of Dr. Pritam Singh was not made on such adv'ice. The
recruitment of Dr. Pritam Singh to the post of Chief Medical Officer was in consultation with the Punjab Public Service Commission.
That appointment was made in the month of May, 1963. Being a
direct recruit he was on probation for two years. He was confirmed thereafter. His starting salary was higher and at th~ time
of confirmation he was getting a salary of Rs. 1,250 p.m. m the
scale of Rs. 8()().50-1500. Dr. Pritaim Singh prior to his appoi~t
ment to the selection grade in the Punjab Civil M~ical ~oc
Class I was getting a salary of Rs. 1,250 p.m: which was higher
than the limit of time scale pay in Class I service.
HARKISHAN V. PUNJAB (Ray, J.)
229
The other contention on behalf of the appellant was that Dr.
Pritam Singh should not have got seniority, over the appellant
and the respondent Dr. Sekhon in the selection grade. Prior to
the appointment of Dr. Pritam Singh to the selection grade the
seniority list of Class I service to which the appellant and the two
respondents belonged was not fixed because of representations
A.
made by various persons including the appellant and Dr. Sekhon.
We are not called upon to go into the seniority list of Class I service because the only controversy now is with regard to the
seniority list of the selection grade.
The appointment of Dr. Pritam Singh to the selection grade
was earlier than that of the appellant and Dr. Sekhon. Therefore,
B
there cannot be any cause for complaint on ground of senionty.
When Dr. Pritam Singh was appointed to the selection grade his
position was last in the list. That was on 20 October, 1966. The
appellant and Dr. Sekhon were promoted to the selection grade
10 days thereafter and their position would be in the ordinary
c .
course befow Dr. Pritam Singh. It would be unjust to hold that
the appellant and Dr. Sekhon would be put at a place higher than
Dr. Pritam Singh. in the seleetion grade.
The High Court correctly expressed the view that there are
no specific rules in regard to the fixation of seniority in the selection grade in the case of a direct appointment. If _there are no
relevant rules with regard to fixation of seniority m the case of
a direct appointment to the selection grade, Dr. Pritam Singh
having been recmited by direct appointment earlier than the
appellant and Dr. Sekhon, Dr. Pritam Singb.'s seniority cannot be
disturbed. That will be unjust.
For these reasons, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
The
parties will pay and bear their own costs.
V.P.S.
A ppea/ dismissed.
D
E