864 79 and 251 80 Under Article 32 of the Constitution K. Garg, V. J. Francis, D. K. Garg and Sunil Kumar Jain for the Appellants in CA No.
Appeals by Special Leave from the Judgment and order, dated 13 9 1973 of the Allahabad High Court in CIVIL Misc.
1 in both the appeals.
N. Dikist and O. P. Rana for Respondent No.
So, Government relied on the old Rules of 1936 for these purposes with some G. O. Or other issued under pressure of exigencies.
Thus, a Service was born but then the rules regulating recruitment, companyditions and classifications were unborn.
Shanti Bhushan and M. C. Bhndare for the Respondents Nos.
1318/76.
2 3 in CA No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA IYER, J. This case illustrates the thesis that unlimited jurisdiction under Art.
1317/76 and Petitioner in WP 251/80.
There were, to begin with, Class I and Class 11 officers, but in 1948, the two were fused into one, viz.
AND WRIT PETITION NOS.
V. Patel, Anil Kumar Gupta, Brij Bhushan, Virendra Singh, N. P. Mahendra and A. M. Tripathi for the Intervener in CA No.
1318/76.
Writ Petition NOS.
1317/76.
Markandaya and V. P. Singh for R. 9 in CA No.
1317/76 R 21 in CA No.
was bound to produce injustice, as it has, in this Service.
1317 1318 of 1976.
2719/69 4034/69.
Later on, separate departments for Buildings and Roads and for irrigations were formed in 1946 as a developmental imperative of the State.
The Service came into being but fresh rules of recruitment were number made.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS .
K. Singhvi, Anil Kumar Gupta, Brij Bhushan, Virendra Singh, N. P. Mahendra, A. M. Tripathi and S. S. Khanduja for the Appellant in CA 1318 76.
Yogeshwar Prasad, Ashok K. Srivastava and Mrs. Rani Chhabra for the Petitioners in WP No.
864/79.
