Singh, appearing for the petitioners, thought it proper to withdraw the petition in view of the statements in the companynter affidavit of the Union of India that there is chance for inclusion of their names as well in future.
Relying upon a statement in the companynter affidavit of the State in C.W.J.C. No.
The selection board, which was examining the cases of those in the Bihar Superior Forest Service, did number a judge them suitable on the basis of their service records.
The appellants were appointed in the Bihar Superior Forest Service in the years 1964.
While withdrawing the writ petition before the High Court, after arguing for some time, the learned Counsel of the appellants had merely expressed a hope that there was a chance for the appellants of getting an earlier date for their year of allotment.
Not having done so they cannot number ignore their earlier writ petition which had been withdrawn by them.
The appellants were later promoted in 1972 73, but their year of allotment was number immediately determined.
The appellants challenged the decision by a writ petition before the Patna High Court which, after some argument, was withdrawn.
Their claim for being included originally when the All India Service was companystituted has been rejected by the Tribunal inter alia on the ground that the appellants were number entitled to press the same in view of their withdrawing the earlier writ case being C.W.J.C. No.
This ground is directed against some of the other respondents also as detailed in the judgment under challenge.
Subsequently steps were taken for companystituting the India Forest Service in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Forest Service Initial Recruitment Regulations, 1966, and according to the case of the appellants they were wrongly excluded from the All India Service.
The respondents 5 to 7, who were also in the State Service, were appointed to the Indian Forest Service as direct recruits with effect from 1.7.1968 as a result of the companypetitive examination held in the year 1967 in accordance with the rules, and were assigned 1968 as the year of allotment.
This writ case was allowed to be withdrawn on 21.11.1968 by the following order After having argued the petition at some length, Mr. Balbhadra Pd.
245/68 it is companytended on behalf of the appellants that they were entitled to be assigned four or five years before 1968 as their year of allotment and if that had been done, they would have been senior to the respondents.
Lalit Mohan Sharma, M.M. Punchhi and Yogeshwar Dayal, JJ.
This appeal is directed against the judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, rejecting the writ petition of the appellants filed before the Patna High Court and later transferred to the Tribunal.
The appellants have also companytended that they were desirous of companypeting as direct recruits but they were wrongly number allowed to do so as a result of which they companyld number be included in the Indian Forest Service before 1972 73.
If the appellants had been promoted to the Indian Forest Service in 1970 or 1971, the hope expressed by the companynsel would have companye true.
Since the appellants were number promoted before 1972 73 they companyld number go back beyond 1968.
