(1.) Special leave granted.
(2.) The appellants were members of the Haryana State Services and were working in different capacities in the State of Haryana in the year 1990. In that year the total strength of the Haryana Civil Service (Executive Branch) was 200 against which only 155 officers were in position; there being 45 vacancies. The Government of Haryana took a decision to resort to special recruitment under Rule 5 of the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 1930 (hereinafter called the Rules) which were admittedly in force then. Special recruitment to service could be made under Rule 5 which rule may be reproduced at this stage :
(3.) Out of 90 candidates whose names were recommended for consideration by different Heads of Departments the State Government, after taking into consideration their inter se merit, suitability and eligibility, recommended the names of 75 candidates to the HPSC for election. While the HPSC was in the process of selecting candidates on the basis of their past record and the interviews, it appears that pursuant to an undertaking given by the Advocate-General of Haryana at the hearing of C.W.P. No. 1201 of 1991 to send the eligible candidates from the education and local self-departments of the State Government, the cases of eligible candidates from these two departments had to be considered and forwarded to the HPSC to enable it to complete the selection process. However, before this could be done the scenario on the political front underwent a change. A new Government headed by Shri Bhajan Lal came to power. It decided to review the decision of the earlier Government in regard to special recruitment and, therefore, the names of candidates from the education and local self-department were not forwarded to the HPSC. The petitioners contended that even though the selection process was at an advanced stage and only the names of candidates from the aforesaid two departments were required to be forwarded the entire process was scuttled by the State Governments refusal to forward the names of the candidates belonging to the said two departments. They further contend that this exercise was undertaken by the newly formed Government in total disregard of the decision of the High Court rendered on April 2, 1991, in C.W.P. No. 1201 of 1991. It may here be mentioned that the newly formed Government called a meeting of the Council of Ministers to review the decision in regard to special recruitment taken by the earlier Government and decided to withdraw the notifications dated December 20, 1990 and January 25, 1991. It was also noticed that there was nothing on Government record to show that the Advocate-General was authorised to give such an undertaking on behalf of the Government. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the administrative department of the State Government decided to withdraw the aforesaid two notifications and the matter was placed before the Council of Ministers for approval as required by the Rules of Business (1977) of the State Government. Thereupon, on December 30, 1991, the following notification was issued :