IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.                    OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 21416 of 2007)

Union Public Service Commission  and another … Appellants

Versus

A.K. Salim and others … Respondents

J U D G M E N T

J.M. PANCHAL, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The instant appeal is directed against judgment

dated  October  18,  2007  rendered  by  the  High

Court  of  Kerala  at  Ernakulam  in  W.P.(C)  No.

30695  of  2007  by  which  direction  dated

September  11,  2007,  given  by  the  Central

Administrative  Tribunal,  Ernakulam  Bench  in

M.A. No. 649 of 2007, which was filed in O.A. No.

26 of 2007, given to UPSC, New Delhi to convene

the  Selection  Committee  meeting  based  on  the

proposal  already  received  from  the  State

Government vide letters dated May 10, 2007 and

June  15,  2007  for  considering  the  case  of  the

applicant  for  promotion  to  the  Indian  Forest

Service, without waiting for further proposals in

respect of additional vacancies, is upheld.

3. The respondent No. 1, i.e., Mr. A.K. Salim, was

appointed as a Forest Range Officer on November

1,  1977.   He  was  thereafter  promoted  as

Assistant  Conservator  of  Forest  on  January  5,

1995.   He  was  also  promoted  as  Deputy

Conservator  of  Forest  (non-cadre).   The

appointment to Indian Forest Service is governed

by  the  provisions  of  Indian  Forest  Services

(Appointment  by  Promotion)  Regulations,  1966.

The respondent No. 1 was confirmed in the cadre

2

post of Assistant Conservator of Forest with effect

from  July  1,  2001.   In  the  seniority  list  of

Assistant Conservator of Forest he was placed at

serial  No.  24  and  was  also  granted  integrity

certificate for consideration of his appointment to

Indian  Forest  Service.   The  name  of  the

respondent No. 1 was included in the select list

prepared in terms of the Regulations of 1966 for

the years 2004 and 2005.  Since the respondent

No.  1  was  confirmed  in  the  cadre  post  of

Assistant Conservator of Forest with effect from

July 1,  2001 and had completed eight years of

service  in  the  year  2003,  his  name  was

considered  and included  for  the  four  vacancies

that arose  during the year  2004.   Similarly his

name for promotion to Indian Forest Service was

included in the year 2005 for the two vacancies

which had arisen in that year.  However, he was

found to be ineligible for being considered for the

vacancies for the years 2004 and 2005 since he

had  not  completed  the  prescribed  eight  years’

3

service.   Likewise,  he  was  found  ineligible  for

being considered for the sole vacancy of the year

2006.  The Selection Committee for Indian Forest

Service met on December 22, 2006 and selected

candidates for eight vacancies for the years 2003,

2004  and  2005.   However,  the  Selection

Committee  did  not  consider  filling  up  the  sole

vacancy  of  the  year  2006.   The  reason  for  not

considering  filling  up  of  the  said  vacancy  was

lack of proposal from the State Government and

the  Principal  Secretary  Forest,  Government  of

Kerala.   The  respondent  No.  1  made

representations  for  his  promotion  to  Indian

Forest  Service  but  of  no  avail.   He,  therefore,

moved  O.A.  No.  26  of  2007  before  the  Central

Administrative  Tribunal,  Ernakulam Bench  and

prayed  to  direct  the  appellants  to  convene

meeting  of  the  Selection  Committee  for

considering  his  case  for  selection  and

appointment  to  Indian  Forest  Service  cadre

4

against the substantive vacancies available as on

January 1, 2006.

4. On service of notice, the appellants contested the

claim of the respondent No. 1 by filing reply.  The

Central  Administrative  Tribunal,  Ernakulam

Bench,  by  judgment  dated  March  9,  2007,

directed  the  State  of  Kerala  and  the  Principal

Secretary  Forests,  Government  of  Kerala,  to

submit the consolidated proposal for considering

the selection to Indian Forest Service for the year

2006 to the UPSC within a period of three weeks

from the date of receipt of copy of the said order.

The Tribunal further directed that on receipt of

such  proposal,  the  UPSC,  New  Delhi  and  the

Selection Committee for selection to Indian Forest

Service  shall  convene a meeting well  before  the

date of retirement of the respondent No. 1, which

was May 31, 2007 in accordance with the Rues.

5. The  record  indicates  that  the  above  mentioned

directions  were  not  complied  with  by  the

appellants.   Therefore,  the  respondent  No.  1

5

moved M.A.  No. 649 of  2007 in O.A. No.  26 of

2007 and prayed to initiate contempt proceedings

against  the  appellants  for  non-compliance  of

directions  dated  March  9,  2007  given  by  the

Central  Administrative  Tribunal,  Ernakulam

Bench in O.A. No. 26 of 2007.

6. The Tribunal issued notice to the appellants.  On

receipt  of  the  notice,  the  appellants  filed  their

reply.  Meanwhile, proposals were received from

Principal  Secretary  Forests,  Government  of

Kerala and the State of Kerala.  After hearing the

learned counsel for the parties, the Tribunal, by

judgment dated September 11, 2007, directed the

UPSC,  New  Delhi  to  convene  the  Selection

Committee  meeting  based  on  the  proposals

already  received  from the  State  Government  by

letters dated May 10, 2007 and June 15, 2007

for considering the case of respondent No. 1 for

promotion  to  Indian  Forest  Service  without

waiting  for  the  further  proposals  in  respect  of

6

additional  vacancies  which  had  arisen  and

disposed of M.A. No. 649 of 2007.

7. Feeling  aggrieved  the  appellants  invoked

extraordinary jurisdiction of High Court of Kerala

at  Ernakulam  under  Article  226  of  the

Constitution by filing W.P. (C) No. 30695 of 2007

and prayed to set aside the directions given by

the Tribunal in M.A. No. 649 of 2007, which was

filed in O.A. No. 26 of 2007.

8. The  High  Court  of  Kerala  at  Ernakulam  has

dismissed the petition filed by the appellants vide

judgment dated October 18, 2007, giving rise to

the instant appeal.

9. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the

parties at length and in great detail.  This Court

has also considered the documents forming part

of the instant appeal.

10. One  of  the  grounds  of  challenge  urged  in  the

memorandum of special leave petition is that no

harm  or  prejudice  would  be  caused  to  the

7

respondent No. 1, i.e., Mr. A.K. Salim if the Select

list  is  prepared  for  all  the  three  vacancies

because according to the appellants, the Tribunal

has already directed to regularize services of the

respondent No. 1 till the date of consideration of

his case for promotion to Indian Forest Service by

the Selection Committee, if he is ultimately found

to  be  eligible  though he  has already  retired  on

May 31, 2007 and, therefore, the judgment of the

High Court,  impugned in appeal,  should be set

aside.  On service of notice, the respondent No. 1

has filed counter affidavit  on January 11, 2008

wherein he has stated that he has no objection if

selection proceedings for the three vacancies for

the year 2006 are initiated.  During the course of

hearing  of  instant  appeal  Mr.  Ranjit  Kumar,

learned senior counsel for the appellants as well

as  Dr.  Sumant  Bhardwaj,  learned  advocate  for

the respondent No. 1 and Mr. B. Dutta, learned

Additional  Solicitor  General  for  Government  of

India,  have  stated  at  the  Bar  that  the  instant

8

appeal  may  be  disposed  of  by  directing  the

appellant  No.  2,  i.e.,  the  Selection  Committee

through  UPSC  to  convene  the  meeting  for

considering  the  case  of  respondent  No.  1  and

others for the three vacancies which had arisen

in  the  year  2006  and  that  the  case  of  the

respondent  No.  1  be  considered  in  the  said

meeting.

11. In view of the consensus arrived at between the

parties,  the  appellant  No.  2,  i.e.,  the  Selection

Committee through UPSC, is directed to convene

the  meeting  for  considering  the  case  of  the

respondent  No.  1  and  other  eligible  candidates

for  promotion  to  Indian  Forest  Services  within

two months from today.  In case the respondent

No. 1 is selected for induction into Indian Forest

Service,  the  intervening  period  shall  be

regularized  notionally  with  effect  from  June  1,

2007 and the respondent No. 1 shall be accorded

all  benefits  including  monetary  benefits.   The

9

appeal  is  allowed  only  to  the  extent  indicated

hereinabove.

12. There shall be no orders as to costs.

………………….……J. [Tarun Chatterjee]

…………………….…J. [J.M. Panchal]

New Delhi; May 16, 2008.

10