That petition was dismissed in limine by a Division Bench of the High Court on October 31, 1975.
612 of 1974 in the Delhi High Court asking that the Government of India be restrained from promoting the appellant to the post of Industrial Adviser and that their claims to the post be companysidered in preference to the appellants claim.
On October 31, 1975 the appellant filed writ petition No.
This appeal by special leave is directed against the speaking order which was passed by the High Court while dismissing the writ petition summarily.
1077 of 1975 in the Delhi High Court to restrain the Government from implementing the recommen dation and to restrain respondents 6 and 7 from taking charge of the posts of Industrial Advisers.
That Committee met on August 7, 1975 for proposing a panel of officers for being companysidered for appointment to the post of Industrial Adviser, but the appellants representation was number placed before the Committee.
The appellant made a further representation to the Government on August 18, 1975 companyplaining that though he was eligible for being appointed to the post of Industrial Adviser, his name was number included in the list of eligible officers which was forwarded to the Departmental Promotion Committee for due companysideration for appointment to the post.
Recruitment to the post of Industrial Adviser Chemi cals was governed originally by the Directorate General of Technical Development Class I posts Recruitment Rules, 1963.
The Committee, in its meeting of August 7, 1975 decided to recommend respondents 6 and 7 for appointment as Industrial Advisers.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 31.10.1975 of the Delhi High Court in Civil Writ No.
Re spondents 6 to 11 and some others who were working as Devel opment Officers filed writ petition No.
In 1974 a question arose regarding promotion to the selec tion post of Industrial Adviser in the Directorate.
That petition was dismissed on September 17, 1975.
On December 1, 1966 the post of Officer on Special Duty was created in the Directorate in order to deal effectively with the development of agro based food processing industries.
During the pendency of the writ petition filed by re spondents 6 to 11, the appellant had made a representation to the Departmental Promotion Committee for companysidering his preferential claim to the post of Industrial Adviser.
In 1964 he was appointed as a Development Officer on an ad hoc basis and that appointment was regularized in May, 1966.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHANDRACHUD, J. On February 7, 1959 the appellant, S. Ramaswamy, was appointed as an Assistant Development Officer in the Directorate General of Technical Development in the Ministry of Industry and Civil Supplies, Government of India.
The Director General Technical Development recommended the appellant for appointment to the post and in companyrse of time the appointment was duly made.
381 of 1976.
Shyamala Pappu and Girish Chandra, for respondents 1 3.
S. Nariman and B.R.G.K. Achar, for the appellant.
1077 of 1975 .
Sobha Dikshit, for respondents 6 7.
