2018 (10) TMI 1212 - HC - Indian Laws

Strength of the post in each of the cadre - determination by Government from time to time - Rule 4 of the Rajasthan Excise Service (General Branch) Rules, 1974 - Held that - Determination of cadre post under the Rules exist so the post not encadred - there is no reason to struck down the Rule 4 (2) (c) and Rule 13 of the Rules of 1974 - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Determination of strength of the service
- Locus standi of the petitioners

Analysis:
1. Determination of strength of the service:
The issue revolves around the determination of the strength of the post of District Excise Officer as per the rules. The court expressed concern over the non-action by the respondent State in determining the strength, emphasizing the importance of complying with Rule 4(2) which mandates the government to determine the strength from time to time. The court highlighted that promotions alone cannot fulfill this requirement without the actual determination of strength by the State Government. It was emphasized that the government needs to determine the strength within a specific timeframe to comply with the rule. The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing the importance of determining the strength to ensure compliance with the rules.

2. Locus standi of the petitioners:
The court briefly touched upon the preliminary objection raised by the respondent regarding the locus standi of the petitioners who filed the writ petition. However, due to the dismissal of the writ petition on other grounds, the court found it unnecessary to delve deeper into this preliminary objection. The dismissal of the writ petition rendered any further discussion on the locus standi of the petitioners redundant.

3. Judgment on D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 663/2007:
The Division Bench dismissed the special appeal challenging the earlier judgment, which had dismissed the writ petition. The appeal challenged Rule 4(2)(c) and Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Excise Service (General Branch) Rules, 1974. The court differentiated between cadre posts and posts not encadred under the rules, emphasizing that appointment to senior posts, including the post of District Excise Officer, should be based on merit and in accordance with the specified procedures. The court clarified that posts not encadred under the rules can be filled through deputation for a limited period. The appeal was dismissed as the court found no reason to interfere with the earlier judgment, agreeing with the findings of the Single Judge.

In conclusion, the judgment focused on the determination of the strength of the service as per the rules and addressed the challenge to the validity of certain rules governing the appointment to senior posts. The court emphasized the importance of complying with the rules and dismissed the writ petition and subsequent special appeal based on the findings and reasoning provided in the original judgment.