Sohan Lal Bhumbak vs State of Punjab

V.K. Bali, J.—Appellant Sohan Lal Bhumbak, Tehsildar, posted as Sub Registrar, Ludhiana (hereinafter to be referred as ''the petitioner'') failed in his endeavour to enforce instructions dated 6.6.1974 issued by the Punjab Government, whereby 25% posts have been reserved for the members of the Scheduled Caste for direct recruitment to all the services and in alternative, instructions dated 4.5.1974 (Annexure P-6), whereby 14% posts have been reserved by the State Government for the aforesaid category, in view of Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India, when his writ petition bearing No. 7664 of 1987 for the relief aforementioned came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide orders dated 25.1.1988. It is against this order of the learned Single Judge that present appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent has been filed.

Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal reveal that the petitioner after having joined Punjab State Government service, according to his version, had earned very good confidential reports and his record of service was reckoned as outstanding. He was selected as Tehsildar on account of his good service record and posted as Sub Registrar, Ludhiana when he filed the writ petition. Under Rule 9 of the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) (Class-I) Rules, 1976, (hereinafter to be referred as ''the Rules of 1976''), Tehsildars are eligible for selection as candidate for Registrar A-I maintained under the rules and can avail appointment to the office of Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch). The petitioner is a Balmiki by caste and is, thus, a Scheduled Caste. The petitioner was an eligible candidate and as such his name was considered for selection to the Registrar A-I against the quota reserved for year 1982. The said quota was recommended by the Government to the Punjab Public Service Commission, Patiala. Petitioner''s name along with 12 other candidates was referred to the Punjab Public Service Commission for consideration. The Commission issued letter dated 31.8.1987 for interview of the petitioner, on 11.9.1987. The Commission declared result on 18.9.1987, which was published in the Tribune on 20.9.1987 selecting respondents 3 to 6 for enrolment on Registrar A-1. The Punjab Government, vide letter dated 6.6.1974, issued instructions under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India whereby 25% of the posts meant for direct recruitment were reserved for members of Scheduled Castes. The Government further decided vide letter dated 4.5.1974 that in the matter of promotions to Class-I and II services, the reservation should be 14% for members of Scheduled Caste. In view of the Government policy of reservation, be it direct recruitment or by way of promotion, benefit of reservation is to be given to all appointments to Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) (Class-I) (hereinafter to be referred as ''the service''), right from the year 1974 onwards. In the year 1984, there were 14 vacancies falling to the share of Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars in Punjab Civil Services Cadre (Registrar A-1). The Government, vide letter dated 9.4.1984 (Annexure P-3), sought recommendations of the Deputy Commissioners and Commissioners for filling up these vacancies. The Government, however, failed to indicate any thing about the reservation in favour of Scheduled Caste candidates. The Government, thus, in flagrant disregard to its own instructions, did not reserve 4 seats out of 14 for Scheduled Caste candidates. However, the Government confined to the selection of only 8 posts leaving 6 posts to be filled up later on. These 8 posts were to be filled up by general candidates. Two more posts were filled up from general categories in 1985. Thus, out of 6 posts, 4 posts falling to the share of members of Scheduled Caste remained vacant. Again, in the year 1984, the Punjab Government, vide letter dated 29.11.1984, sought to fill up these 4 posts from amongst the Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars. However, the Government again failed to reserve these 4 posts for members of Scheduled Castes in violation of Government instructions dated 6.6.1974. The Commission interviewed the petitioner, respondents 3 to 6 and other candidates on 18.9.1987 confining its recommendations only to the candidates from general category. In the event of these 4 posts being confined for the members of Scheduled Caste, the petitioner was bound to be selected as he is member of Scheduled Caste and has priority amongst the members of Scheduled Castes being a Balmiki.

From the facts, as have been called out from the pleadings made in the writ petition, it would, thus, appear that the case of the petitioner is for giving effect to instructions dated 6.6.1974 or instructions dated 4.5.1974 in the matter of reservation for Scheduled Caste category in the service. In case the appointment in the service is to be held as direct recruitment, in that event, the petitioner wishes to enforce instructions dated 6.6.1974 whereby 25% posts have been reserved for the members of Scheduled Caste and in case appointment to the service aforesaid is to be made by way of promotion, the petitioner wishes to have 14% reservation by virtue of instructions dated 4.5.1974,

The petitioner can succeed in getting the desired relief only if he is able to make out that appointment in the service is either by way of direct recruitment or by way of promotion. The issue involved in this case, in view of the pleadings and contentions raised by the counsel representing the petitioner, can be determined only on the basis of the rules governing appointment to the service. Relevant Rules of the Rules of 1976, thus, need an immediate attention.

Direct appointment has been defined under Rule 2(c) of the Rules of 1976 to mean an appointment made otherwise than by promotion or by transfer of an official already in the service of the Government of India or of a State Government. Number and character of posts as per Rule 3 of the Rules of 1976, would consist of such number of posts as the Government may from time to time determine keeping in view of the requirements of the Service and a member of the Service may be posted to any administrative post in the Service. Appointment to the service, as per Rule 7 of the Rules of 1976, is made in the manner provided under Rules 8 to 15 from amongst accepted candidates whose names have been duly entered in accordance with these rules in the Registers of accepted candidates to be maintained under these rules. Rules 8 to 15 of the Rules of 1976, having direct bearing on facts of present case, read thus:''

"8. The following Registers of accepted candidates shall be maintained by the Chief Secretary to Government, Punjab, namely :-

(1) Register A-1 in which shall be entered the names of Tehsildars and Naib-Tehsildars accepted as candidates;

(2) Register A-II in which shall be entered the names of temporary members of Class II and members of Class III services serving in connection with the affairs of the Stale of Punjab and holding ministerial appointments accepted as candidates;

(3) Register A-III in which shall be entered the names of persons accepted as candidates from amongst Excise and Taxation Officers, Block Development and Panchayat Officers and District Development and Panchayat Officers serv- ing in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab;

(4) Register B in which shall be entered the names of the persons accepted as candidates as a result of competitive examination; and

(5) Register C in which shall be entered the names of persons accepted as candidates from amongst officers or officials serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab who are not covered by any of the categories of officers or officials herein before mentioned in this rule."

(1) Each Deputy Commissioner shall, at such time in a year as the Financial Commissioner, Revenue, may, by general or special order require, recommended to the Commissioner of the Division, the name of one Tehsildar or Naib-Tehsildar posted in his District, whom he considers most suitable for appointment to the Service.

(2) The Commissioner of a Division shall, forward the names recommended by the Deputy Commissioners under sub-rule (1) to the Financial Commissioner Revenue and may recommend to him the names of one or more persons from amongst the Tehsildars or Naib-Tehsildars posted in the Districts under his charge, considered suitable by him for appointment to the Service.

(3) The Financial Commissioner, Revenue shall consider the names of persons recommended by the Deputy Commissioners and the Commissioners and prepare a list, from amongst such persons, of candidates considered suitable by him for appointment to the Service and may include the names of any other Tehsildars and Naib-Tehsildars considered suitable by him in such list

Provided that the list prepared by the Financial Commissioner, Revenue shall not contain names exceeding twice the number of candidates to be brought on Register A-I. (4) The list prepared under sub-rule (3) shall be submitted by the Financial Commissioner, Revenue to the Chief Minister through the Revenue Minister, each of whom may add any name to the list from amongst Tehsildars and Naib-Tehsildars considered suitable by them for appointment to the Service and the list so prepared shall be treated as the final list.

(5) The name of a person shall not be included in the final list unless he-

(a) is a confirmed hand and has completed ten years continuous service under the Government;

(b) was under the age of 45 years on the first day of November immediately preceding the date of submission of names by the nominating authorities; and

(c) is a graduate of a recognised University.

(6) Each year at such time as the Government may require, the Financial Commissioner, Revenue shall submit to the Government the nomination rolls in Form I of persons borne on the final list prepared under sub-rule (4).

(7) The nomination rolls submitted under sub-rule (6) along with the service record of the candidates shall be forwarded by the Government to the Commission which shall consider the merits of each candidate and recommend the names of the persons considered suitable for appointment to the Service duly arranged in the order of merit:

(8) The names of persons recommended by the commission under sub-rule (7), shall be entered in Register A-I in the order in which they are recommended by the Commission."

"10. (1) Each of the authorities specified in the first column of the table below may submit to the Government in Form I attached to these rules the nomination rolls of such number of persons as is specified in each case in the second column of the said table from amongst the temporary members of Class II Service and members of Class III Services, holding ministerial appointments and working in its office or in the offices subordinate to it :-

TABLE

1

2

Chief Minister

2

Ministers and Ministers of Stale 1 (each)

Speaker

Punjab Vidhan Sabha

Hon''ble the Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab

2

Deputy Ministers

1 (each)

Chief Parliamentary Secretary and Parliamentary Secretary

1 (each)

Chief Secretary

5

Financial Commissioners

1 (each)

(2) No nomination roll in respect of a person shall be submitted under the provisions of sub-rule (1) unless such person -

(a) is a confirmed hand and has completed 10 years continuous service under the Government;

(b) was under the age of forty-five years on the first day of November immediately preceding the date of submission of names by the nominating authorities; and

(c) is a graduate of recognised University.

(3) The nomination rolls submitted under sub-rule (1) along with the service record of the candidates shall be forwarded to the Commission which shall consider the merits of each such candidate and recommend such of the candidates as are considered suitable for appointment to the Service.

(4) The names of the persons recommended by the Commission under sub-rule (3) shall be entered in Register A-II in the order in which they are recommended by the Commission."

"11. (1) Each of the authorities specified in the first column of the Table below may submit to the Government through the Administrative Secretary of the respective Department in Form I attached to the rules the nomination rolls of such number of the persons as is specified in each case in the second column of the said Table from amongst Excise and Taxation Officers, Block Development and Panchayat officers and District Development and Panchayat Officers :-

TABLE

Nominating Authorities

Number of nominations

1

2

Minister Incharge of the respective category of post

1

Administrative Secretary of the respective Department.

1

Head of the respective Department

1

(2) No nomination roll in respect of a person shall be submitted under the provisions of sub-rule (1) un-less such person -

(a) is a confirmed hand and has completed 10 years continuous service under the Government;

(b) was under the age of 45 years on the first day of November immediately preceding the date of submission of names by the nominating authorities; and

(c) is a graduate of recognised University.

(3) The nomination rolls submitted under sub-rule (1) along with the service record of the candidates shall be forwarded by the Government to the Commission, which shall consider the merits of each such candidate and recommend such of the candidates as are considered suitable for appointment to the Service.

(4) The names of the persons recommended by the Commission under sub-rule (3) shall be entered in Register A-III in the order in which they are recommended by the Commission:

Provided that the Commission shall, while recommending names from amongst Excise and Taxation Officers on the one hand and District Development and Panchayat Officers and Block Development and Panchayat Officers on the other, maintain inter se ratio of 7:4."

"12. (1) A competitive examination, hereinafter called "the examination", the regulations of which are contained in the Appendix II to these rules, shall be held at any place in the State of Punjab as and when notified by the Government through the Commission for the purpose of selection by competition of as many candidates for the Service as Government may determine.

(2) Notice of the date fixed for the examination shall be published in the Punjab Government Gazette."

"13. (1) Applications for permission to sit in the examination will be called by the Commission and shall be made in the manner and form prescribed, and accompanied by such documents or papers as may be required by the Commission in this behalf.

(2) No person shall be allowed to appear in the examination -

(a) Who has not attained the age of twenty-one years or who will have attained the age of twenty-seven years or who is beyond such other age limits as may be prescribed by Government from time to time, for entry into Service under the State, on or before the first day of January immediately preceding the last date appointed by the Commission for the submission of applications:

Provided that in the case of the candidate who belongs to Scheduled Castes or Backward Classes the upper age limit shall be such as may, from time to time, be fixed by the Government, in respect of entry into Service under the State of persons belonging to such castes or classes;

(b) who does not possess at least a bachelor''s degree of a recognised University in Arts, Science or Commerce; and

(c) who does not by the closing date for receipt of applications to be notified by the Commission, send a treasury receipt or crossed Postal Order on account of a non-refundable examination fee as fixed by the Commission :

Provided that a Government servant holding a ministerial appointment under the Punjab Government including Courts, who has not less than for years'' continuous service under the Government on the first day of January immediately preceding the last date appointed by the Commission for the submission of applications shall be eligible to appear in the examination if he possesses at least a bachelor''s degree of a recognised University in Arts, Science or Commerce and has not attained the age of 38 years subject to the condition that he has not availed of three chances in addition to those which he might have already availed of in any other capacity."

Note. - Any person who is eligible as Government servant under this rule and wishes to appear in the examination, shall submit his application in the prescribed form through the Head of his Office, to the Secretary to the Commission.

" 14. Subject to the provision of rule 13, Government shall include in Register ''B'' in order of merit determined by the Commission, the names of such number of candidates as it may, from time to time, determine, from amongst those who have been declared as qualified in the examination by the Commission."

"15. (1) Each of the authorities specified in the first column of the Table below may submit to the Government through the Administrative Secretary of the respective Department in Form II attached to the rules the nomination rolls of such number of persons as is specified in each case in the second column of the said Table from amongst officers or officials working in its office or offices subordinate to it who are not covered by any of the categories of officers or officials mentioned in rule 9, 10 and 11:-

TABLE

Nominating Authorities

Number of nominations

1

2

Minister Incharge of the respective Department

1

Administrative Secretary of the respective Department.

1

Head of the respective Department

1

(2) No nomination roll in respect of a person shall be submitted under the provisions of sub-rule (1) unless such person -

(a) is a confirmed hand and has completed 10 years'' continuous service under the Government;

(b) was under the age of 45 years on the first day of November immediately preceding the dale of submission of names by the nominating authorities; and

(c) is a graduate of recognised University.

(3) The nomination rolls submitted under sub-rule (1) along with the service record of the candidates shall be forwarded by the Government to the Commission which shall consider the merits of each such candidate and recommend such of the candidates as are considered suitable for appointment to the Service.

(4) The names of the persons recommended by the Commission shall be entered in Register ''C'' in the order in which they are recommended by the Commission."

The Government, then makes appointments to the service in pursuance of Rule 7 from amongst the candidates entered on the various Registers in a slab of 100 vacancies, as would be clear from Rule 18 reproduced below:

"18. The Government shall make appointments to the Service in pursuance of rule 7 from amongst the candidates entered on the various Registers in a slab of 100 vacancies as follows:-

(i) the first vacancy and thereafter every alternative vacancy shall be filled from amongst candidates borne on Register ''B''.

(ii) the 2nd, 8th, 14th, 20th, 26th, 32nd, 38th, 44th, 50th, 56th, 62nd, 68th, 74th, 80th, 86th, 92nd, 96th and 100th vacancy shall be filled from amongst the candidates borne on Register A-I;

(iii) the 4th, 10th, 16th, 22nd, 28th, 34th, 40th, 46th, 52nd, 58th, 64th, 70th, 76th, 82nd, 88th and 98th vacancy shall be filled from amongst candidates borne on Register A-II;

(iv) the 12th, 30th, 42nd, 54th, 66th, 78th and 90th vacancy shall be filled from amongst the Excise and Taxation Officers accepted as candidates on Register A-III;

(v) the 18th, 36th, 60th and 84th vacancy shall be filled from amongst the District Development and Panchayat Officers or Block Development and Panchayat Officers accepted as candidates on Register A-III; and

(vi) the 6th, 24th, 48th, 72nd and 94th vacancy shall be filled from amongst the candidates on Register ''C'':

Provided that all such appointments shall in the first instance be either officiating or substantive provisional."

The primary and in fact the only contention of Mr. Vikas Singh, learned counsel representing the petitioner, based on the rules, reproduced above, is that direct appointment has been defined under Rule 2(c) to mean an appointment made otherwise than by promotion or by transfer. Mode of selection and appointment, as envisaged under the rules aforesaid, being otherwise than promotion or transfer, shall have to be considered as direct appointment for which concededly there is 25% reservation for Scheduled Caste candidates. In case the Court might, however, hold method of selection and appointment envisaged in the rules aforesaid to be by way of promotion, in that case there had to be reservation of 14% for the candidates belonging to the same category, further contends the counsel. The Government, however, made a clear departure in making appointment to the services when it completely ignored instructions dated 6.6.1974 and 4.5.1974, which were in fact applicable to all services of the Government.

We have heard learned counsel representing the parties and with their assistance gone through the records of the case as also examined the Rules of 1976. We, however, do not find any merit in the only contention of the learned counsel, noted above.

A reading of Rules 8 to 15 and 18 reproduced above would make it clear that whereas Register A-I caters for appointment of Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars to the service, Register A-II caters for temporary members of Class II and Class III in service who are serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab and holding ministerial appointments. Register A-III deals with the appointment of Excise and Taxation Officers, Block Development and Panchayat Officers and District Development and Panchayat Officers serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab, whereas by virtue of Register, C, officers or officials serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab, who are not covered by any of the categories meant for Registers A-I, A-II and A-III are appointed to service. Register B caters for appointing candidates as a result of competitive examination i.e. direct recruitment. Selection of candidates from various Registers i.e. A-I, A-II, A-III, B and C, is then dealt with by specific rules.

Rule 9 deals with selection of candidates for Register A-I. The Deputy Commissioner, in the first instance, recommends to the Commissioner the name of one Tehsildar or Naib Tehsildar posted in his District, whom he considers most suitable for appointment to the service. The Commissioner in rum then forwards the names recommended by the Deputy Commissioner to the Financial Commissioner and may recommend the names of one or more persons from amongst the Tehsildars or Naib Tehsildars posted in the Districts under his charge, considered suitable by him for appointment to the service. The Financial Commissioner then considers the names recommended by the Deputy Commissioners and the Commissioners and prepares a list, from amongst such persons, of candidates considered suitable by him for appointment to the service. He has also discretion to include the names of any other Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars considered suitable by him in such list. The list prepared by the Financial Commissioner cannot go beyond twice the number of candidates to be brought on Register A-I. The list prepared by the Financial Commissioner is then submitted to the Chief Minister through the Revenue Minister, each of whom may add any name to the list from amongst Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars considered suitable by them for appointment to the service. The list so prepared is then to be treated as final. Even though Deputy Commissioner, Financial Commissioner, Revenue Minister and the Chief Minister have discretion vested in them to recommend the name of the most suitable candidate, as the case may be, sub-rule (5) of Rule 9 makes it incumbent upon them to recommend the names of Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars, who is a confirmed hand and has completed ten years continuous service under the Government, who is under the age of 45 years and is also a graduate of a recognised University. The nomination rolls along with service record of the candidates are then forwarded by the Government to the Punjab Public Service Commission, which considers the merits of each candidate and recommends the names of the persons considered suitable for appointment to the service duly arranged in the order of merit and then their names are entered in Register A-I.

Rule 10 deals with selection of candidates for Register A-II. The authorities specified in the first column of the table given under Rule 10 submit to the Government the nomination rolls of such number of persons as is specified in each case in second column of the said table from amongst the temporary members of Class II and Class III services, holding ministerial appointments and working in its office or in the, offices subordinate to it. Whereas, Chief Minister and Hon''ble the Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court can make two nominations, Ministers and Ministers of State, Speaker of Punjab Vidhan Sabha, Deputy Ministers, Chief Parliamentary Secretary and Parliamentary Secretary and Financial Commissioners can nominate one person each. The Chief Secretary, however, can make the nomination of five persons. Once again, there is a discretion vested with the authorities, mentioned above, to make nomination, but by virtue of sub-rule (2) of Rule 10, such employees must be confirmed hand and also completed 10 years continuous service under the Government. They also must be under the age of 45 years and graduate of recognised University. The nomination rolls are then forwarded to the Commission, which considers the merits of each such candidate and recommends such of the candidates as are considered suitable for the appoint- ment to the service. The names of the persons recommended by the Commission are then entered in Register A-II.

Rule 11 deals with selection of candidates for Register A-III. The authorities specified in the first column of the table given below under Rule 11 have to submit to the Government through the Administrative Secretary of the respective Departments the nomination rolls of such number of person, as is specified in each case in the second column of the said table from amongst Excise and Taxation Officers, Block Development and Panchayat Officers and District Development and Panchayat Officers. The Minister Incharge of the respective category of post. Administrative Secretary of the respective Department and Head of the respective Department can make one nomination each. Once again, by virtue of sub-rule (2) of Rule 11, it is only a confirmed hand, who has completed 10 years of continuous service under the Government and is under the age of 45 years and is a graduate of recognised University can be recommended. The nomination rolls are then submitted to the Commission, which considers the merits of each such candidate and recommends such of the candidates as are considered suitable for appointment to the service. The names of persons recommended by the Commission are then entered in Register A-III.

Rule 12, as mentioned above, deals with competitive examination to be held for selection of candidates from Register B. Rule 13 deals with admission of candidates to the competitive examination. Rule 14 deals with selection of candidates for Register B. Rule 15 deals with candidates for Register C. The authorities mentioned in the first column of the table given below under Rule 15 have to submit to the Government through the Administrative Secretary of the respective Departments the nomination rolls of such number of persons, as is specified in each case in the second column of the said table from amongst the officers or officials working in its office or offices subordinate to it. The Minister Incharge of respective Department, Administrative Secretary of the respective Department and Head of the respective Department can make one nomination each. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 15 like other rules makes it necessary that the candidate so nominated, must be a confirmed hand and has completed 10 years continuous service under the Government and should be under the age of 45 years and should be a graduate of recognised University. The nomination rolls are then forwarded to the Commission which has to consider merits of each candidate and recommend such of the candidates as are considered suitable for appointment to the service. Names of persons recommended by the Commission are then entered in Register C. Appointment of accepted candidates under various Registers, stated above, is then made by virtue of provisions of Rule 18 in pursuance of Rule 7 from amongst the candidates entered on the various Registers in a slab of 100 vacancies, as reproduced above.

A combined reading of rules, referred to above, would manifest that for all categories different Registers are made wherein names of candidates are entered. Whereas, for Register B, names of persons accepted as candidates as a result of competitive examination have to be entered, with regard to all other Registers, i.e. Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C, nominations are made on the dint of provisions contained in Rules 9, 10, 11 and 15. Insofar, as direct recruitment is concerned, same has specifically been dealt with by Register B and the method of appointment is by way of competitive examination in view of provisions contained in Rules 12, 13 and 14.

The rules as such are not under challenge. In fact, the petitioner wants appointment to the service on the dint and by virtue of rules dealing with Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C. It is obvious, inasmuch as, the moment the petitioner stakes his claim under Register B meant for direct recruitment, he shall have to compete by way of examination. He does not want that. His endeavour is to come through Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C. Like employees of general category, he also wishes to be nominated and indeed the petitioner has been nominated. Once, the rules in specific terms stipulate that appointment to the service shall be by way of nomination, the petitioner cannot singularly bank upon the definition of direct appointment in Rule 2(c) to contend that inasmuch as direct appointment means an appointment made otherwise than by promotion or by transfer of an official, the case in hand for appointment being not by way of promotion or transfer is to be treated by direct appointment. That part, the definition of direct appointment alone cannot be conclusive. All the rules dealing with mode and method of appointment under the Rules of 1976, have to be necessarily examined and reading of the same, as mentioned above, makes it clear that whereas, there is one method of direct recruitment provided under the rules, which caters for 50% of the seats, the other 50% seats are to be filled by way of nomination.

Learned Single Judge repelled the contention of learned counsel, noted above, by observing thus:

"there is an obvious fallacy in the submission. Modes of recruitment are not to be read in the definition of the term "direct appointment" given in Rule 2(c) of the Rules. Modes of recruitment to the service are given in Rules 9, 10, 11 and 12 and it is therefrom that various registers are maintained of the selected candidates under Rule 8 of the Rules for appointment to the service from time to time. Therefore, recruitment to the service is not confined to the two modes only; rather nomination is recognised as one of the modes under the Rules and since those who are selected out of the nominated candidates are already in one or the other service, that the framers of the Rules have provided one more class of these taken in the service "by transfer" and excluded them from the class of direct recruitment within the meaning of Rule 2(c) of the Rules."

We find no infirmity whatsoever, in the observations made by the learned Single Judge. We are rather in respectful agreement with the same. Selection by the Commission to the service for Register A-I containing the names of the Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars is neither direct recruitment under the Rules so as to attract Annexure P-1 nor is promotion under the Rules so as to attract Annexure P-6. The candidates entered to the various Registers, referred to above, are all drawn from different services. Register A-I talks of Tehsildars and Naib Tehsildars, whereas Register A-II deals with members of Class II and Class III services, holding ministerial appointments. Register A-III, as mentioned above, deals with candidates from amongst Excise and Taxation Officers, Block Development and Panchayat Officers and District Development and Panchayat Officers serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab, whereas, Register C deals with the candidates from amongst officers or officials serving in connection with the affairs of the State of Punjab who are not covered under any other categories belonging to Registers A-I, A-II and A-III. All these persons drawn from different services are then appointed to the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) (Class I). Direct appointment it cannot be, as the same has been specifically dealt with by way of Register B, which is through a competitive examination and it cannot be a case of promotion either, as none of the persons belonging to various categories is promoted from a lower post to a higher post in the hierarchy of the posts in the concerned department. For yet another reason, appointment to the service belonging to Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C cannot be either by the direct recruitment or by promotion. Some of the persons and categories pertaining to Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C are serving in connection with the affairs of the State, which have nothing at all to do with the administration. Category belonging to Register A-III dealing with Excise and Taxation Officers, Block Development and Panchayat Officers and District Development and Panchayat Officers, needs pertinent mention. Further, inasmuch as, appointment to the service being merit oriented would necessarily exclude reservation. It may be recalled that at all stages while dealing with Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C suitability of the candidate has to be considered. No doubt, in a given case, a suitable or most suitable candidate may belong to reserved category but even in that case, he shall be appointed on the dint of merit and not on the basis of reserved category of Scheduled Caste.

Before we may, however, part with this judgment, we would like to mention that learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in Uttam Singh v. State of Punjab and others 1986(1) SLR The facts of the case aforesaid reveal that the petitioner therein challenged selection and appointment of respondent No. 3 to the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch). The Government proposed to fill in six vacancies in the service from amongst the Tehsildars/Naib Tehsildars against the quota of vacancies for the years 1978, 1980 and 1982. The Government desired the Deputy Commissioners to send through proper channel the nomination rolls of Tehsildars/Naib Tehsildars who fulfilled the conditions prescribed in Rule 9(5) of the Rules. One of the material guidelines laid down in the circular of the Government was that "separate nomination may please be sent in respect of vacancies concerning each year". As a result of this communication, various Deputy Commissioners in the State recommended the names of various persons (Tehsildars/Naib Tehsildars) including the petitioner and respondent No. 3 for their selection and appointment to the service. After considering the service records of these recommendees, the State Government directed four candidates including the petitioner and respondent No. 3 to appear for interview in the office of the Punjab Public Service Commission for their selection/recruitment against the quota of vacancies for the year 1978. As a result of this interview, the Commission recommended the name of respondent No. 3 for appointment to the service who was then appointed to the service. Contention of the petitioner was that though he himself having been appointed as a Naib Tehsildar with effect from 12.3.1976, was eligible to be so considered and appointed to the service yet respondent No. 3, who had been appointed as a Naib Tehsildar for the first time vide order dated 22.9.1979, was not so eligible to be considered for selection or appointment to the vacancy earmarked for the year 1978. The stand of the Government was though in the year 1978, respondent No. 3 was neither a Tehsildar nor a Naib Tehsildar yet at the time of making of the recommendation by the Commission, he fully satisfied the requirement of Rule 9 and was thus eligible to be recommended by the Commission for appointment to the service. It was also highlighted that the Rules do not lay down that a candidate recommended for a vacancy existing for a particular year should have been working as Naib Tehsildar/Tehsildar prior to the year for which a quota vacancy has to be filled in Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch). The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the said case was that Rule 9 and more particularly Clauses (1) and (6) thereof envisage yearly selection of candidates for Register A-I and Rule 18 lays down the quota and rotation of the vacancies to be filled in by the candidates from Register A-I. It was further argued that had the State Government prepared such a list of the candidates being placed in Register A-I in the year 1978 for filling in vacancies meant for such candidates in that year, respondent No. 3 would not have been available for any such consideration and appointment, as he had not been appointed as a Naib Tehsildar till 22.9.1979. It was further argued that respondent No. 3 might have been available for consideration and recruitment for the subsequent vacancies meant for Tehsildars/Naib Tehsildars in the years 1980 and 1982 but he did not deserve any consideration for appointment against the quota vacancy earmarked for 1978. Direct judgment of Supreme Court was relied upon for the proposition, as canvassed by learned counsel, as mentioned above. On the other hand it was argued by learned counsel for respondent No. 3 that it was not a case of promotion at all and was rather a case of direct recruitment to the service. The aforesaid contention was repelled by the learned Single Judge by observing as follows:-

"I, however, see no merit in this stand of the respondent, neither this is a case of the State. Clause (c) of Rule 2 which has been reproduced above, defines direct appointment. It lays down that it means an appointment made otherwise than by promotion or by transfer of an official already in the service of the Government of India or a State Government. Persons in the service of the State Government like the petitioner and respondent No. 3 are appointed to the service, i.e. Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) by way of promotion based on selection. It is only through Register ''B'' that persons are recruited by way of direct appointment. As per Clause (4) of Rule 8 reproduced above, their names are entered in Register ''B'' as a result of a competitive examination."

The observations of the learned Single Judge, reproduced above, have been made in the context of argument raised by learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 therein that it was not a case of promotion at all and was rather a case of direct recruitment to the service. The contention was repelled on the ground that mode of direct recruitment has been specifically provided in the Rules and, therefore, it cannot be a case of promotion. There was no controversy in the case of aforesaid as to whether mode of appointment of the candidates for Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C would be by way of promotion or by way of nomination. The judgment, in our view, cannot support the cause of the petitioner that mode of appointment with regard to candidates for Registers A-I, A-II, A-III and C would be by way of promotion.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon a judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in Madan Lal v. State of Punjab and another 1991(8) SLR 742 : 1992(2) SCT 691 (P&H)). In view of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in Uttam Singh''s case (supra), reproduced above, learned Single Judge in Madan Lal''s case (supra) further observed thus:-

"I am in respectfully agreement with the observations of the learned Single Judge in Uttam Singh''s case (supra) that appointment from Registrar A-I is not a direct recruitment, which is separately dealt with under Rule 8(4) read with Rule 12 of the Rules. Consequently, it can be held that appointment from Register A-I is a sort of promotion by nomination."

The facts of the case aforesaid reveal that the petitioner had joined as an Inspector in the Department of Food and Supplies. He was selected as a Tehsildar in the State of Punjab as a direct recruit in 1986. He joined as Tehsildar in 1986 itself. He was confirmed as Tehsildar in 1990. He staked his claim for being considered for nomination to the Punjab Public Service Commission (Executive Branch), governed by the Rules of 1976 but was denied the same by the respondents primarily on the ground that according to the amended Rule 9(5) of the Rules of 1976, the petitioner was not eligible for being considered for nomination. While dealing with the contention of the petitioner, it was held that unamended Rules would apply as the vacancy for which the appointment had to be made was in existence prior to appointment. Once again, the question as to whether appointment for Registrars A-I, A-II, A-III and C is by way of promotion or by way of nomination was not in issue.

Concededly, instructions dated 6.6.1974 and 4.5.1974 are dealing with reservation to the extent of 25% and 14%, respectively in direct recruitment and promotion. Reservation has not been provided in recruitment made by way of nomination. The benefit of reservation can be availed of only if specifically provided and no writ lies to command the Government to make reservation as such.

Finding no merit in this letters patent appeal, We dismiss the same, thus, upholding the order of learned Single Judge. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.

Appeal dismissed.