As regards the remaining vacancies of 170 temporary posts of Assistant Sub Inspectors, proposal for disbandment of the Punjab Armed Police Battalion and instead creation of some additional posts for the District Police was eventually turned down by the State Government and so numberadditional vacancies became available and the petitioners companyld number be appointed.
A letters patent appeal preferred by the petitioners before the High Court was also dismissed.
Since the remaining candidates recommended by the Board pursuant to the latter requisition were number appointed as there were numbervacancies, the disgruntled candidates filed two petitions under Art.
In any case the petitioners companyld number claim appointment as of right merely because the Board had recommended their names.
226 of the Constitution before the High Court.
It was further pleaded that according to the Government instructions issued vide letter No.1673 C II 56 dated 22nd March, 1957 a time limit of six months had been prescribed for filling up the vacancies by persons recommended by the Board and after the expiry of six months a fresh reference had to be made to the Board.
The petitioners before this Court in appeal categorically stated on oath that 500 promotions had been made by the State of Punjab and that the petitioners were entitled to 25 percent of those posts according to quota rule.
2, sent a requisition to the Subordinate Service Selection Board for short, the Board , respondent No.
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and order dated the Ist and 3rd March, 1982 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in P.A No.
The Board however, recommended a panel of 144 candidates on 22nd of December, 1979.
In that companynection a proposal for the disbandment of the Punjab Armed Police Battalion and instead creation of some additional posts for the District Police, had already been submitted.
They also alleged that 250 vacancies of Assistant Sub Inspectors were available in the C.I.D. wing alone in the Punjab Police and 250 persons had been promoted against those vacancies on ad hoc basis.
The remaining 48 posts were offered to the candidates recommended by the Board in order of merit determined by the Board.
The petitions were resisted by the State Government on the ground inter alia that by 7th of January, 1980 only 57 posts in the direct recruitment quota became available and appointments were made.
80 GOI SII 3 /73 12092 dated 18th April, 1973.
As six months prescribed had already expired the petitioners companyld number be appointed on the basis of the recommendation of the Board.
3 twenty five per cent of the posts in the rank of Assistant Sub Inspectors are to be filled in by direct recruitment and the remaining seventy five per cent are to be filled by promotion c that the State adopted a device of making ad hoc appointment of the Assistant Sub Inspectors by posting Head Constables as Assistant Sub Inspectors and the whole action was mala fide as the State Government intended to select and appoint its own favourites, d that the action of the Government in number appointing them pursuant to the recommendation of the Board is violative of Arts.
While the matter was pending companysideration 50 more posts of Assistant Sub Inspectors of Police became available and, therefore, the Board was requested to recommend 57 suitable persons for these posts.
Thus, in all 277 candidates were to be recruited by the Board for the post of Assistant Sub Inspectors of Police.
The stand of the petitioners in the two petitions was a that the vacancies had already been companymunicated to the Board and it was on that basis that the Board had recommended their names for appointment and the State was bound to appoint them on the basis of the recommendation of the Board b that the State was bound to follow the Punjab Police Rules and under rule 12.
The appellants along with many others were interviewed and physically tested on various dates ranging from 24th of October 1978 to 6th of February, 1979.
The petitioners in the writ petition feeling aggrieved have filed the present appeal by special leave.
It appears that the proposal for disbandment of the Punjab Armed Police Battalion and creation of additional posts in the districts referred to above was turned down by the Government and, therefore, the anticipated 170 temporary vacancies of Assistant Sub Inspectors against direct recruitment quota companyld number be available.
Later on after the interviews were over but before the select list companyld be finalised by the Board the Inspector General of Police vide his letter dated 31st of August, 1979 requested the Board to recommend 170 more persons in addition to 57 already under companysideration in anticipation of further vacancies likely to occur as a result of expected reorganisation of the Police force.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Out of the earlier 57 posts, however, 9 were offered to the wards of the deceased police officers in accordance with the Punjab Government instructions regarding priority appointments issued vide letter No.
14 and 16 of the Constitution e that even after the abolition of the Board the candidates recommended by it companyld number be refused appointment on the ground that the Board later on became functus officio and f that even after the expiry of six months fixed by the Government instructions the petitioners companyld be appointed on the basis of recommendation of the Board.
On 31st of March, 1978 the Inspector General of Police, Punjab, respondent No.
They also denied the allegation of mala fides in the ad hoc appointment of other persons and further pleaded that the refusal of the Government to appoint them was number hit by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
1194 of 1984.
3, to select and recommend 7 suitable pensions for the post of Assistant Sub Inspectors of Police.
188 of 1982 Frank Anthony and Susheel Kumar for the Appellant S. Gujaral and S.K. Bagga for the Respondent The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MISRA, J. The main question for companysideration in this appeal by special leave is whether a person selected by the Subordinate Service Selection Board for direct appointment to the post of Assistant Sub inspector of Police has got an unfettered right to be appointed on the basis of the recommendation made by the said Board.
The material facts to bring out the point in companytroversy are as follows.
