KAILASH LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts which have given rise to this writ petition may be briefly stated. The petitioner, who holds a diplopia in Mechanical Engineering, was appointed as a Store Supervisor 'Survey and Investigation' by the order of the Chief Engineer, Rajasthan Ground Water Board, Jodhpur dated Feb. 1, 1968 in a temporary capacity for a period of six months or till a duly selected person was available. The petitioner continued to hold the said post for over three years but by the order of the Chief Engineer dated July 23, 1971, he, along with some other persons, was declared surplus & was directed to report to the Deputy Chief Engineer, Under Ground Water Board, Jodhpur for adjudgment of his suitability for equivalent post. Thereafter, by the order of the Chief Engineer, dated Sept. 7, 1971 the petitioner was declared surplus with immediate effect, on account of abolition of some of the posts of Blasting Supervisors. The petitioner was, however, allowed to continue to work in the Rajasthan Ground Water Board Department till his absorption by the General Administrative Department on an equivalent post. The last mentioned order was subsequently modified by the Chief Engineer by his order dated Nov. 9, 1971 whereby the services of the petitioner, as a temporary supervisor, were terminated with effect from Dec. 8, 1971, as he was not found suitable for the post of Blasting Supervisor by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Commission') in the interview held for the aforesaid post on 3rd, 4th and 5th Feb., 1971. The petitioner has alleged in the writ petition that the respondent Nos. 4 to 11 were selected by the Commission at the interview held on the aforesaid dates and they were appointed on the posts of Blasting Supervisors as a result of their selection by the Commission. However, it is not in dispute that the petitioner also appealed before the Commission for the post of Blasting Supervisor a, the said interview, bit he was not selected for that post by the Commission. The petitioner has challenged in this writ petition the order of termination of his service passed by the Chief Engineer on Nov. 9, 1971.

(2.) The case of the petitioner as set up in the writ petition was two-fold, firstly, that the selections held by the Commission on 3rd, 4th and 5th Feb., 1971 were illegal and invalid as only one Member of the Commission was present at the said interview and the result of such interview was also not approved by all the Members of the Commission before the same was sent to the State Govt. Secondly, his case is that the respondent Nos. 12, 13 and 14 were junior to the petitioner and although the service of the petitioner was terminated by the order of the Chief Engineer, dated Nov. 9, 1971 yet the respondent Nos. 12, 13 and 14 were retained in service of the Rajasthan Under Ground Water Board, even thereafter.

(3.) When this writ petition came up for final hearing on Oct. 2, 1974 it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the question of invalidity of the aforesaid interview held by the Commission in Feb. 1971 was also subject matter of consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in some other cases. The hearing of this writ petition was, therefore, deferred and it was ordered that this ease may be listed for hearing after the decision of the Division Bench in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No 721 of 1972; State of Rajasthan Vs. Amar Singh and others '. It may be pointed out that since then the afore said appeal has been decided by the judgment of this Court dated Oct. 14, 1976 along with another appeal;: The State of Rajasthan Vs. K.K. Bhatia and others, D.B. Civil Special appeal No. 38 of 1972 (1). It may also be mentioned here that before the appeal in Amar Singh's case could be hear d by this Court, the Governor of Rajasthan promulgated "The Rajasthan Public Service Commission Regulation & Validation of Procedure Ordinance, 1975" which was later on replaced by Act. No. 5 of 1976 bearing the same name (hereinafter called "the Validation Act"). By the provisions of the Validation Act, the powers, duties and functions of the Commission under the Constitution or under the Service Rules made under Art. 309 of the Constitution or under any other law could be exercised by the Chairman, one or more of the Members or all the Members of the Commission jointly or severally. The Validation Act further declared that all things done and actions taken, selections made, recommendations made, advice given by one or more Members of the Commission shall be deemed to have been done, taken, held, made or given by the entire Commission. Thus Validation of all things done or actions taken by the Commission or any one or more Members there of was brought on to operation with retrospective effect from Jan. 21, 1961 by the provisions of the Validation Act.