From the Judgment and Order dated 5 9 1975 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No.
And here, in this Court, the Army Wing is fighting back to repulse the civilian wing by defusing the war head of these two fundamental rights.
The companystitutional missiles used, with success, in the encounter in the High Court by the civilians to shoot down the military mens preferential claims under the relevant service rules, are Articles 14 and 16.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA IYER, J. These two sister appeals have gained access to this Court by certificate under Article 133 and project a service dispute between the Army and civilian wings both engineers of the Survey of India.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
1269/75 N. Sinha, Attorney General for India, E. C. Agarwala and Girish Chandra for the Appellants In CA 1755/75 .
P. Rao, M.S. Ganesh, A.K. Ganguli and T.V. S. Narasimhachari for the Appellants in Ca 1754/75.
A survey of the story of this companyflict suggests the sombre thought that unending litigation, affecting the public services with inevitable impact on morale and efficiency, is becoming an epidemic in companyrts even among strategic cadres and sensitive sectors a matter almost for companysternation which surely must kindle a search for companystitutional alternatives for resolution of service questions without large numbers of civil servants being locked in long drawn out legal struggles.
A narration of facts falling within a short companypass will unfold the real issue, revolving round the salary, seniority and de facto promo 1039 tional disparity inter se, which has sparked off the forensic war.
Military imagery vivifies the litigative havoc when sectors of our public services go to battle against each other, though there is so much else to wage war against in the service of the people.
1745 1755 of 1975.
Does the experience of 30 years under the Constitution indicate that, save where fundamental companystitutional issues arise, Whitley companyncils, Service Tribunals and other specialised adjudicatory agencies, with the imprimatur of finality, are a more pragmatic mechanism of Service Justice ?
Both the appeals against the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh companyer the same subject matter, although one of them is by the Central Government and the other by the members of the Survey of India from among the Defence personnel, and both have been resisted on the same basis by the civilian recruits to the Service.
The Union of India, one of the appellants, supports the stand of the military sector of the Survey Service, if we may so designate it.
Govindan Nair, A. K. Sen, Bishambar Lal, Miss Munisha Gupta and Mrs. Baby Krishnan for RR 1 2 in CA 1754/75 and CA 1755/75.
The factual setting, sufficient to unravel the companystitutional companytention, may number be delineated.
