GOPAL SINGH versus STATE CADRE FOREST OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AND ORS.

Citation: [2007] 6 S.C.R. 586 · Decided: 15-05-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.K. SEMA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
GOPALSINGH 
v. 
STATE CADRE FOREST OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION AND ORS. 
MAY 15, 2007 
[H.K. SEMA AND V.S. SIRPURKAR, JJ.] 
Forest Act, 1927-Section 2(2) & 32(a)-Indian Forest Service 
(Recruitment) Rules, 1966--Rules 2(g)(ii), 4 & 8-Indian Forest Service 
C (Service) Rules, 1966-Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) 
Regulations, 1966-Regulation 5(2)-Indian Forest Service (Initial 
Recruitment) Regulations, 1966-Indian Forest Department Class Service 
(Fixation of Cadre Strength) Regulations, 1966-Andaman Forest Service 
(Fixation of Cadre I & Class II Gazetted Posts) Recruitment Rules, 1963 as 
amended in 1973-Andaman & Nicobar Forest Service Rules, 199I-5, 14 
D & 17-Petition by employee holding the post of Assistant Mill Manager 
before Tribunal claiming promotion to the post of Deputy Conservator of 
Forests by treating his post as equivalent to the post of Assistant Conservator 
of Forest a feeder post-Tribunal allowing the petition-High Court 
dismissing the Writ Petition preferred by the Stat~orrectness of-Held, the 
E post of Assistant Mill Manager is not connected with forestry and is not 
approved by the Central Government for being included in the State Forest 
Service under IFS (Recruitment) Rules 1966-Post is not equivalent to the 
post of Assistant Conservator of Forest under the Rules-Hence, claim for 
promotion to the post of Deputy Conservator of Forest rejected 
F 
Appellant was initially appointed as part of the Forest Department of 
Andaman & Nicobar Islands which was governed by Andaman Forest 
Department (Class I & Class II Gazetted Posts) Recruitment Rules, 1963 as 
amended in 1973. The appellant was gradually promoted to the ~t of Assistant 
Mill Manager (AMM). The appellant filed an Original Application before 
Central Administrative Tribunal claiming promotion to the post of Deputy 
G Conservator of Forests (DCF) contending that his ~t of AMM was equivalent 
to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF), which is a feeder post 
under 1963 Rules as amended in 1973; and that he was eligible for inclusion 
in the list of officers of the Andaman Forest Ser1ice for appointment on 
promotion to the ~t of DCF specified in Schedule to Regulation 5 of Indian 
H 
586 
GOP AL SINGH "· STA TE CADRE FOREST omcERS' ASSOCIATION 
587 
. 
-' y 
Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1966. 
A 
Respondent-State filed objections before the Tribunal contending that 
the appellant was in the Technical side and that he could have no claim to the 
post on ACF and DCF which are on the forestry side; that the recruitment to 
the posts are governed by Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966; 
B 
that the posts of ACF is a separate cadre and they alone were eligible for 
induction in the Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) 
~ 
Regulations, 1966; that the post of AMM is not concerned with forestry; that 
-.J... 
the AMM was not included as a feeder cadre for promotion to the post of DCF 
--
in 1963 Rules nor was it a post of equivalent grade to the post of ACF; and 
that after the constitution oflndian Forest Service during 1966, all the posts c 
of DCF were encadred into the IFS and therefore 1963 Rules have not 
application. 
The Tribunal dismissed the Original Application of the appellant 
accepting the objections raised by the States. The appellant filed a Review 
D 
Application before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the Review Application 
holding that AMM and ACF were equivalent and feeder posts for promotion 
-<. 
to the post of DCF under 1963 Recruitment Rules; that AMM is also connected 
>-
with forestry; that the holder of the post of AMM fell within the category of 
officers referred to in Rule 2(g) of IFS (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 foJ the 
purposes of inclusion in the select list of Andaman and Nicobar Forest Service E 
to be considered for promotion to the Union Territory cadre. 
The order of the Tribunal was challenged by the State and State Cadre 
Forest Officers' Association by filing Writ Petitions before High Court. The 
High Court allowed the Writ Petitions. The High Court held that the post of 
F 
AMM was only of a technical nature and could not be said to be 'connected 
with forestry'; that the post of AMM was outside the IFS (Recruitment) Rules, 
1966; that only the post of ACF is the feeder post for promotion to the post of 
DCF; that there was no approval granted by the Central Government regarding 
the service of AMM as envisaged in Rul

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.