OM PRAKASH GARG Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S a petition challenging the action of the RajaSthan Public Service CommiSSion reSpondent 3 in declining to approve the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion. Committee and the action of the State reSpondent Mo. 1 in not appointing him by promotion aS a Reader under the RajaSthan Medical Service (Collegiate Branch) RuleS, 1962 (hereinafter to be- called "the 1962 RuleS" ).

(2.) "service;' is defined in 1952 Rules by rule 3 (1) to mean the Rajasthan Medical Service (Collegiate Branch ). Recruitment as per rule 7 to the service is to be by one of the methods : (a) direct recruitment (in accordance with Part IV of thess Rules), and (b) by promotion of substantive members of service in accordance with Part V of these Rules.

(3.) TO complete the statement of facts I may mention that one Dr. (Mrs.) Nirmal Miglani who was a Reader in Paediatrics went on leave in May 1972 and respondent No. 5 who was then working as a Lecturer was promoted as an officiating Reader purely on temporary and ad hoc basis for a period of six months or till Dr. (Mrs.) Nirmel Miglani returned from abroad whichever is earlier It appears that when Dr. (Mrs) Nirmal Miglani came back an order was passed on 20 12-72 by the Department transferring respondent 5 as a Reader at Jodhpur while reverting the petitioner as a Lecturer. Though there is not much relevancy of this for the points that a?e to be determined in the writ petition, this fact has been highlighted to suggest that respondent 5 was being favoured by pointing out that though the petitioner had been promoted as a Reader since 31. 1. 70 and was working as such since then he was reverted by the order of 20. 12. 72 while respondent 5 who was given a leave vacancy in place of Dr. (Mrs.) Nirmal Miglani in May, 1972 was allowed to continue as such a Reader. As this point is not relevant for decision in the present writ petition I need not say anything further on this.