Jaswant Singh Nerwal Vs. The State of Punjab & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 334 of 1978
Petitioner: Jaswant Singh Nerwal
Respondent: The State of Punjab & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 334 of 1978
Judges: MADAN MOHAN PUNCHHI & K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 14, 1991
Head Note:
SERVICE AND LABOUR LAW
Selection
Recruitment in the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) an Allied services – Selection by Punjab Public Service Commission – Father of B, a candidate, was Member of the Commission – When B was interviewed, his father i not participate in the eliberations – Selection of B up
Held:
Direction of the High Court requiring B to appear again for the interview with unsuccessful candidate set aside.
Held –
Cases Reffered:
1. Ashok Kumar and an Ors. etc. etc. v. State of Haryana & Ors. etc. etc., 1985 (Supp) SCR 657 – relied. (Paras 5 an 7)
2. Javid Rasool Bhat & Ors. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors., 1984 (2) SCC 631. (Para 4)
3. A.K. Kraipak & Ors. etc. v. Union of India & Ors., 1970 (1) SCC 457 – Distinguished. (Para 4)
4. B.N. Nagarajan & Ors. v. State of Mysore & Ors., 1966 (3) SCR 682. (Para 4)
2. Javid Rasool Bhat & Ors. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors., 1984 (2) SCC 631. (Para 4)
3. A.K. Kraipak & Ors. etc. v. Union of India & Ors., 1970 (1) SCC 457 – Distinguished. (Para 4)
4. B.N. Nagarajan & Ors. v. State of Mysore & Ors., 1966 (3) SCR 682. (Para 4)
JUDGEMENT:
PUNCHHI, J. :
1. These two allied appeals arising from a common judgment of the Punjab an Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, in Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 1172 of 1974 an 1860 of 1975, on grant of special leave, can appropriately be disposed of by a common judgment.
2. In order to recruit 71 officers in the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) an Allied services, the Punjab Public Service Commission, at the behest of the State of Punjab,held a competitive examination in December, 1972. As advertised 12 vacancies were for the Punjab Civil Services an the remaining for Allied services. The applying candidate as per the requirement of the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules, 1930 (for short the Rules) specified the posts in order of preference in their respective applications. The result of those who were declare qualified was published in the daily Tribune ate September 21, 1973. Out of the 71 candidate declare successful Shri V.M. Bansal, the appellant in Civil Appeal No.833 of 1977 was declare successful for a post in the Punjab Civil Service an Shri Jaswant Singh Nerwal, the appellant in Civil Appeal No.334 of 1978 for the post of Tehsilar in the Allied services. Some of the unsuccessful candidate challenge this selection in its entirety on various grounds before the High Court through Civil Writ Petition No.1172 of 1974. On the other hand challenge in Civil Writ Petition No. 1860 of 1975 was made by Nerwal against Bansal for the latter having been allowed in the meantime substitute preference for the posts to the ones given in the first instance in his application, an which led to his becoming a Punjab Civil Services Officer an Nerwal to be a Tehsilar, in the Allied services an had the substitution not been allowed the position would have been that Nerwal would have been in the P.C.S. an Bansal an Excise & Taxation Officer. The challenge thus was to the Commission having allowed substitution of the preference. The High Court negative the challenge of Nerwal an his claim to be declare successful to a post in the Punjab Civil Service in preference to Bansal an thus dismissed Civil Writ Petition No.1860 of 1975. Simultaneously Writ Petition No.1172 of 1974 preferred by the unsuccessful candidates was allowed in part inasmuch as the selection of Bansal as a Punjab Civil Service Officer an his consequential appointment was quashed. The High Court, however, i not disturb the selection of the remaining 70 successful candidates but require Bansal to compete again by issuing the following direction:
“However, he is entitle to compete with the other unsuccessful candidates for securing place in the merit an we, therefore, direct that Shri V.M. Bansal (responent no.8) along with the other unsuccessful candidates be again interviewed by the members of the Commission except Shri J.R. Bansal (responent no.4) an whosoever is selected on merits shall have to be appointed against the post for which he is selected in accordance with the Rules. We may, however, observe that if Shri J.R. Bansal (responent no.8) is again selected on merits, he will be entitle to his original seniority an all other benefits of the Service which he would have enjoyed had his selection not been quashed. If in any case, no candidates is selected against the post of P.C.S. Care in accordance with the Rules, any of the other selected candidates may then make representation to the Government for being appointed to the post of P.C.S. in accordance with the Rules.”
3. Bansal is here before us to have the aforesaid direction quashed an Nerwal to have the place of Bansal as a Punjab Civil Service Officer.
4. We heard learned counsel for the respective parties on every aspect of the case at great length. The High Court was goaded to issue the above direction regulating selection between Bansal an other unsuccessful candidates, as also the consequence thereof, on applying the decision of this Court in A.K. Kraipak & Ors. etc. versus Union of India & Ors.1 to neutralise Bansal’s father Shri J.R. Bansal being a member of the Public Service Commission. An even though he had not participate in the eliberations of the Commission, when Bansal had been interviewed, his brooding presence was held negatively to have influence the selection an the possible ouster of a possibly successful candidate. Kraipak’s case was one where one of the persons, who sat as a member of the selection boar, was himself, one of the persons to be considered for selection. He participate in the eliberations of the selection boar when the claims of his rivals were considered. He participate in the decisions relating to the preference in seniority. He participate at every stage in the eliberations of the selection boar where there was conflict between his interest an duty. In such set of facts this Court unhesitatingly came to the conclusion that there was a reasonable likelihood of bias an therefore the principles of natural justice had got violate. But this Court in Javid Rasool Bhat & Ors. versus State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.2 i not vitiate the selection of a candidate to admission in a medical college on the ground of presence in the selection boar of the father of one of the candidate. In this case, the Principal of Medical College, Srinagar whose daughter was a candidate for admission to the Medical College informed the Selection Committee at the very outset about this fact an told them that he would not have anything to o with a written test an would not be present when his daughter would be interviewed. The other members of the Selection Committee agree to the proposal. The procedure adopted by the Selection Committee an the members concerned was in accord with the generally accepted an well known procedure adopted by the Public Service Commissions every where in the country, as it was not unusual for candidates relate to members of the Service Commission an Selection Committees to seek employment. In such a situation the practice generally in vogue is for the member concerned to excuse himself when the particular candidate is interviewed an such a selection is beyond challenge, unless, of course, malafied. See this Court’s decision in B.N. Nagarajan & Ors. vs. State of Mysore & Ors.3 also.
5. Then we have the momentous decision of this Court in Ashok Kumar and an Ors. etc. etc. vs. State of Haryana & Ors. etc. etc.4 which without whittling own the salutary principle evolve in Kraipak’s case (supra) has put the Public Service Commissions,being creatures of the Constitution, at a higher pedestal. At pages 686-87, it was rule as follows:
“But the situation here is a little different because the selection of candidate to the Haryana Civil Service (Executive) an allied services is being made not by any Selection Committee constitute for that purpose but it is being one by the Haryana Public Service Commission which is a Commission set up under Article 316 of the Constitution. It is a Commission which consists of a Chairman an a specified number of members an is a Constitutional Authority. We o not think that the principle which requires that a member of a Selection Committee whose close relative is appearing for selection should decline to become a member of the selection committee or withdraw from it leaving it to the appointing authority to nominate another person in his place, nee be applied in case of a Constitutional Authority like the Public Service Commission, whether Central or State. If a member of a Public Service Commission were to withdraw altogether from the selection process on the ground that a close relative of his is appearing for selection, no other person save a member can be substitute in his place. An it may sometimes happen that no other member is available to take the place of such member an the functioning of the Public Service Commission may be affected. When two or more members of a Public Service Commission are holing a viva voce examination they are functioning not as individuals but as the Public Service Commission. Of course, we must make it clear that when a close relative of a member of a Public Service Commission is appearing for interview, such member must withdraw from partic ipation in the interview of that candidate an must not take part in any discussion in regard to the merits of that cand didate an even the marks or credits given to that candidate should not be is close to him.”
6. It was the admitted case before the High Court that Bansal’s father i participate in the eliberations of the Commission when the viva voce test of other candidates appearing before the Commission had been taken an he had accordingly aware marks to the candidates otherwise competing with his own son. The High Court has still deduced that inspite of the afore-suggested bias the candidates who got selected against the posts (except his son) got their due un-biased an therefore their selection cannot be questioned. Taking this deduction to be correct, the High Court before issuing the direction under challenge, had further to fin that there was bias in excluding the unsuccessful candidates. We o not fin this to have engage the attention of the High Court. It is noticeable that besides Bansal’s father there were four other members of the Public Service Commission an who had functioned as a Commission. As is evident there was a long list of as many 540 candidates to be interviewed an the interviews went on from 24-9-1973 uptill 30-10-1973. In the nature of things, there was no material before the High Court,an none has been pointed to us,from which it could be concluded that the members of the Commission could keep track of the comparatives of each of those 540 candidates so as to manipulate a favourable result to Bansal. We have not been shown any material to entertain the doubt that Bansal’s father being a member of the Public Service Commission, per-se had the effect of other members keeping track of comparatives in order to single out Bansal as a successful candidate. An lastly there is not a word of malafied suggested against the other members of the Public Service Commission, of having share the suppose animus of Bansal’s father. Thus, in the facts an circumstances of this case,we o not fin any reason to sustain the judgment of the High Court on this aspect of the case. Bansal’s father i what was expected of him, in having decline to participate in the eliberations of the Commission when Bansal went for the viva voce test.
7. Our view in this regard is further strengthened by the manner in which the viva voce test is conducted an which the High Court even has not disapprove. It appears that out of a total of 825 marks, 625 marks have been allotted for written tests an the remaining 200 marks are for viva voce test. These viva voce marks are distribute in various heads as enumerate by the High Court. What is significant is that each member individually gets 25 marks but on actual working, if one of them is not attending, the share of marks are divided in the present members. Further these marks are strictly not divided as 25 marks for each member but each member allots marks to each candidate out of 125 marks an these when added are divided by 5 or by the actual number of members present an participating in the interview. We may not be taken to be commending such a system of division of marks out of the allocate marks for the viva voce test but it seems this is the practice in which they are actually worked out. Similarly the provision of 200 marks for viva voce test cannot meet our approval because of the percentage now authoritatively fixe in Ashok Kumar Yadav’s case (supra). On these particulars an for these reasons no single member can possibly usurp to himself the total functioning of the Commission an jealous as human nature is, no other member can be expected to have abdicated his powers to another, at that level, an to oblige another. These circumstances o not give rise to the likelihood of Bansal’s father espousing the cause of his son to the other four members of the Commission an monitor the performance of 540 candidates to be interviewed, the results of written examination of which, he was not allege to be aware beforehand. In these circumstances, we fin it difficult to uphold the view of the High Court requiring Bansal to be interviewed again so as to rub against the unsuccessful candidates an to suffer the consequence.
8. On the grant of special leave to Bansal, operation of the judgment an order of the High Court appealed against, was on 27th July, 1977, stayed. Bansal has stayed put an working as an Officer in the Punjab Civil Service an his displacement at the present stage would otherwise be inequitous serving nobody’s purpose due to the time lag. The unsuccessful candidates cannot possibly now, at this stage, due to age an other supervening factors, be fit for the viva voce test, so as to elbow out Bansal. The obedience of the directions of the High Court at this late stage would overly be counter productive an thus not worth sustaining.
9. This brings us to the claim of Nerwal for displacement of Bansal from the post in the Punjab Civil Service in substitution to that held by him as a Tehsilar. The facts as found by the High Court are that initially Shri V.M. Bansal’s first preference was for the post of Excise & Taxation Officer, but on December 4, 1973, he had intimate to the Commission that he require change of his preference so that his first preference was of Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch). The intimation was receive in the office of the Commission on December 4, 1974 itself an the Chairman of the Commission on the same ate allowed the change. That such change was permissible before the declaration of the result is beyond dispute. What was urge before the High Court was that since Bansal’s application i not form part of all like applications sent in a bundle by the Commission to the State Government on 11th December, 1973 an had rather been sent separately later on December 20, 1973, that by itself raise a doubt as to the authenticity thereof. The High Court negative the contention. It held that this circumstance alone i not conclusively prove that the change of preference was intimate to the Commission after the declaration of the result on December 7, 1973 as allege. Though the High Court went on to observe that there was no statutory rule that no change in preference could be made after the result is communicate by the Commission to the State Government, we are not oblige to go into that question. In face of the fining of the High Court that circumstantially it was established on the record that the preference had been change by Bansal on 4-12-73, before the declaration of the result, it is difficult to take a contrary view. The High Court had even seen the original record to come to that view. Such like inferences drawn are in the realm of facts an we have not been persuade to take a different view. Once this is established that the change of preference could be made an it was intimate an approve timely, the conclusion is inescapable that Bansal’s first preference to a post in the Punjab Civil Service ranked superior to Nerwal’s preference, because of their inter-se ranking in the examination results. Thus, the appeal of Jaswant Singh Nerwal has no substance deserving rejection.
10. Resultantly for the views afore-expressed, Civil Appeal No. 833 of 1977 preferred by Shri V.M. Bansal is allowed an the Civil Writ Petition No.1172 of 1974 before the High Court would stand dismissed an Civil Appeal No. 334 of 1978 of Shri Jaswant Singh Nerwal would stand dismissed affirming the dismissal of his Writ Petition No.1860 of 1975 before the High Court, but without any order as to costs in both appeals.
1. These two allied appeals arising from a common judgment of the Punjab an Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, in Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 1172 of 1974 an 1860 of 1975, on grant of special leave, can appropriately be disposed of by a common judgment.
2. In order to recruit 71 officers in the Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) an Allied services, the Punjab Public Service Commission, at the behest of the State of Punjab,held a competitive examination in December, 1972. As advertised 12 vacancies were for the Punjab Civil Services an the remaining for Allied services. The applying candidate as per the requirement of the Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch) Rules, 1930 (for short the Rules) specified the posts in order of preference in their respective applications. The result of those who were declare qualified was published in the daily Tribune ate September 21, 1973. Out of the 71 candidate declare successful Shri V.M. Bansal, the appellant in Civil Appeal No.833 of 1977 was declare successful for a post in the Punjab Civil Service an Shri Jaswant Singh Nerwal, the appellant in Civil Appeal No.334 of 1978 for the post of Tehsilar in the Allied services. Some of the unsuccessful candidate challenge this selection in its entirety on various grounds before the High Court through Civil Writ Petition No.1172 of 1974. On the other hand challenge in Civil Writ Petition No. 1860 of 1975 was made by Nerwal against Bansal for the latter having been allowed in the meantime substitute preference for the posts to the ones given in the first instance in his application, an which led to his becoming a Punjab Civil Services Officer an Nerwal to be a Tehsilar, in the Allied services an had the substitution not been allowed the position would have been that Nerwal would have been in the P.C.S. an Bansal an Excise & Taxation Officer. The challenge thus was to the Commission having allowed substitution of the preference. The High Court negative the challenge of Nerwal an his claim to be declare successful to a post in the Punjab Civil Service in preference to Bansal an thus dismissed Civil Writ Petition No.1860 of 1975. Simultaneously Writ Petition No.1172 of 1974 preferred by the unsuccessful candidates was allowed in part inasmuch as the selection of Bansal as a Punjab Civil Service Officer an his consequential appointment was quashed. The High Court, however, i not disturb the selection of the remaining 70 successful candidates but require Bansal to compete again by issuing the following direction:
“However, he is entitle to compete with the other unsuccessful candidates for securing place in the merit an we, therefore, direct that Shri V.M. Bansal (responent no.8) along with the other unsuccessful candidates be again interviewed by the members of the Commission except Shri J.R. Bansal (responent no.4) an whosoever is selected on merits shall have to be appointed against the post for which he is selected in accordance with the Rules. We may, however, observe that if Shri J.R. Bansal (responent no.8) is again selected on merits, he will be entitle to his original seniority an all other benefits of the Service which he would have enjoyed had his selection not been quashed. If in any case, no candidates is selected against the post of P.C.S. Care in accordance with the Rules, any of the other selected candidates may then make representation to the Government for being appointed to the post of P.C.S. in accordance with the Rules.”
3. Bansal is here before us to have the aforesaid direction quashed an Nerwal to have the place of Bansal as a Punjab Civil Service Officer.
4. We heard learned counsel for the respective parties on every aspect of the case at great length. The High Court was goaded to issue the above direction regulating selection between Bansal an other unsuccessful candidates, as also the consequence thereof, on applying the decision of this Court in A.K. Kraipak & Ors. etc. versus Union of India & Ors.1 to neutralise Bansal’s father Shri J.R. Bansal being a member of the Public Service Commission. An even though he had not participate in the eliberations of the Commission, when Bansal had been interviewed, his brooding presence was held negatively to have influence the selection an the possible ouster of a possibly successful candidate. Kraipak’s case was one where one of the persons, who sat as a member of the selection boar, was himself, one of the persons to be considered for selection. He participate in the eliberations of the selection boar when the claims of his rivals were considered. He participate in the decisions relating to the preference in seniority. He participate at every stage in the eliberations of the selection boar where there was conflict between his interest an duty. In such set of facts this Court unhesitatingly came to the conclusion that there was a reasonable likelihood of bias an therefore the principles of natural justice had got violate. But this Court in Javid Rasool Bhat & Ors. versus State of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors.2 i not vitiate the selection of a candidate to admission in a medical college on the ground of presence in the selection boar of the father of one of the candidate. In this case, the Principal of Medical College, Srinagar whose daughter was a candidate for admission to the Medical College informed the Selection Committee at the very outset about this fact an told them that he would not have anything to o with a written test an would not be present when his daughter would be interviewed. The other members of the Selection Committee agree to the proposal. The procedure adopted by the Selection Committee an the members concerned was in accord with the generally accepted an well known procedure adopted by the Public Service Commissions every where in the country, as it was not unusual for candidates relate to members of the Service Commission an Selection Committees to seek employment. In such a situation the practice generally in vogue is for the member concerned to excuse himself when the particular candidate is interviewed an such a selection is beyond challenge, unless, of course, malafied. See this Court’s decision in B.N. Nagarajan & Ors. vs. State of Mysore & Ors.3 also.
5. Then we have the momentous decision of this Court in Ashok Kumar and an Ors. etc. etc. vs. State of Haryana & Ors. etc. etc.4 which without whittling own the salutary principle evolve in Kraipak’s case (supra) has put the Public Service Commissions,being creatures of the Constitution, at a higher pedestal. At pages 686-87, it was rule as follows:
“But the situation here is a little different because the selection of candidate to the Haryana Civil Service (Executive) an allied services is being made not by any Selection Committee constitute for that purpose but it is being one by the Haryana Public Service Commission which is a Commission set up under Article 316 of the Constitution. It is a Commission which consists of a Chairman an a specified number of members an is a Constitutional Authority. We o not think that the principle which requires that a member of a Selection Committee whose close relative is appearing for selection should decline to become a member of the selection committee or withdraw from it leaving it to the appointing authority to nominate another person in his place, nee be applied in case of a Constitutional Authority like the Public Service Commission, whether Central or State. If a member of a Public Service Commission were to withdraw altogether from the selection process on the ground that a close relative of his is appearing for selection, no other person save a member can be substitute in his place. An it may sometimes happen that no other member is available to take the place of such member an the functioning of the Public Service Commission may be affected. When two or more members of a Public Service Commission are holing a viva voce examination they are functioning not as individuals but as the Public Service Commission. Of course, we must make it clear that when a close relative of a member of a Public Service Commission is appearing for interview, such member must withdraw from partic ipation in the interview of that candidate an must not take part in any discussion in regard to the merits of that cand didate an even the marks or credits given to that candidate should not be is close to him.”
6. It was the admitted case before the High Court that Bansal’s father i participate in the eliberations of the Commission when the viva voce test of other candidates appearing before the Commission had been taken an he had accordingly aware marks to the candidates otherwise competing with his own son. The High Court has still deduced that inspite of the afore-suggested bias the candidates who got selected against the posts (except his son) got their due un-biased an therefore their selection cannot be questioned. Taking this deduction to be correct, the High Court before issuing the direction under challenge, had further to fin that there was bias in excluding the unsuccessful candidates. We o not fin this to have engage the attention of the High Court. It is noticeable that besides Bansal’s father there were four other members of the Public Service Commission an who had functioned as a Commission. As is evident there was a long list of as many 540 candidates to be interviewed an the interviews went on from 24-9-1973 uptill 30-10-1973. In the nature of things, there was no material before the High Court,an none has been pointed to us,from which it could be concluded that the members of the Commission could keep track of the comparatives of each of those 540 candidates so as to manipulate a favourable result to Bansal. We have not been shown any material to entertain the doubt that Bansal’s father being a member of the Public Service Commission, per-se had the effect of other members keeping track of comparatives in order to single out Bansal as a successful candidate. An lastly there is not a word of malafied suggested against the other members of the Public Service Commission, of having share the suppose animus of Bansal’s father. Thus, in the facts an circumstances of this case,we o not fin any reason to sustain the judgment of the High Court on this aspect of the case. Bansal’s father i what was expected of him, in having decline to participate in the eliberations of the Commission when Bansal went for the viva voce test.
7. Our view in this regard is further strengthened by the manner in which the viva voce test is conducted an which the High Court even has not disapprove. It appears that out of a total of 825 marks, 625 marks have been allotted for written tests an the remaining 200 marks are for viva voce test. These viva voce marks are distribute in various heads as enumerate by the High Court. What is significant is that each member individually gets 25 marks but on actual working, if one of them is not attending, the share of marks are divided in the present members. Further these marks are strictly not divided as 25 marks for each member but each member allots marks to each candidate out of 125 marks an these when added are divided by 5 or by the actual number of members present an participating in the interview. We may not be taken to be commending such a system of division of marks out of the allocate marks for the viva voce test but it seems this is the practice in which they are actually worked out. Similarly the provision of 200 marks for viva voce test cannot meet our approval because of the percentage now authoritatively fixe in Ashok Kumar Yadav’s case (supra). On these particulars an for these reasons no single member can possibly usurp to himself the total functioning of the Commission an jealous as human nature is, no other member can be expected to have abdicated his powers to another, at that level, an to oblige another. These circumstances o not give rise to the likelihood of Bansal’s father espousing the cause of his son to the other four members of the Commission an monitor the performance of 540 candidates to be interviewed, the results of written examination of which, he was not allege to be aware beforehand. In these circumstances, we fin it difficult to uphold the view of the High Court requiring Bansal to be interviewed again so as to rub against the unsuccessful candidates an to suffer the consequence.
8. On the grant of special leave to Bansal, operation of the judgment an order of the High Court appealed against, was on 27th July, 1977, stayed. Bansal has stayed put an working as an Officer in the Punjab Civil Service an his displacement at the present stage would otherwise be inequitous serving nobody’s purpose due to the time lag. The unsuccessful candidates cannot possibly now, at this stage, due to age an other supervening factors, be fit for the viva voce test, so as to elbow out Bansal. The obedience of the directions of the High Court at this late stage would overly be counter productive an thus not worth sustaining.
9. This brings us to the claim of Nerwal for displacement of Bansal from the post in the Punjab Civil Service in substitution to that held by him as a Tehsilar. The facts as found by the High Court are that initially Shri V.M. Bansal’s first preference was for the post of Excise & Taxation Officer, but on December 4, 1973, he had intimate to the Commission that he require change of his preference so that his first preference was of Punjab Civil Service (Executive Branch). The intimation was receive in the office of the Commission on December 4, 1974 itself an the Chairman of the Commission on the same ate allowed the change. That such change was permissible before the declaration of the result is beyond dispute. What was urge before the High Court was that since Bansal’s application i not form part of all like applications sent in a bundle by the Commission to the State Government on 11th December, 1973 an had rather been sent separately later on December 20, 1973, that by itself raise a doubt as to the authenticity thereof. The High Court negative the contention. It held that this circumstance alone i not conclusively prove that the change of preference was intimate to the Commission after the declaration of the result on December 7, 1973 as allege. Though the High Court went on to observe that there was no statutory rule that no change in preference could be made after the result is communicate by the Commission to the State Government, we are not oblige to go into that question. In face of the fining of the High Court that circumstantially it was established on the record that the preference had been change by Bansal on 4-12-73, before the declaration of the result, it is difficult to take a contrary view. The High Court had even seen the original record to come to that view. Such like inferences drawn are in the realm of facts an we have not been persuade to take a different view. Once this is established that the change of preference could be made an it was intimate an approve timely, the conclusion is inescapable that Bansal’s first preference to a post in the Punjab Civil Service ranked superior to Nerwal’s preference, because of their inter-se ranking in the examination results. Thus, the appeal of Jaswant Singh Nerwal has no substance deserving rejection.
10. Resultantly for the views afore-expressed, Civil Appeal No. 833 of 1977 preferred by Shri V.M. Bansal is allowed an the Civil Writ Petition No.1172 of 1974 before the High Court would stand dismissed an Civil Appeal No. 334 of 1978 of Shri Jaswant Singh Nerwal would stand dismissed affirming the dismissal of his Writ Petition No.1860 of 1975 before the High Court, but without any order as to costs in both appeals.
