J. & K. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ETC. versus DR. NARINDER MOHAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1993] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 900 · Decided: 07-12-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
J. & K. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ETC. 
v. 
DR. NARINDER MOHAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
DECEMBER 7, 1993 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N.P. SINGH, JJ.] 
Constitution of lndi~Ait. 16~The sc~pe and ambit of executive 
power under Article 162. 
C 
Art. 320 (Section 133 of the J. & K Constitution)-Public Service 
Commission constituted undefL-The purpose behind the power enjoyed by, 
and duty cast upon it. 
Service law-Jammu & Kashmir Medical Education (Gazetted) Service 
Rercruitment Rules-Regularisation directed by the High Court by adopting a 
D procedure not contemplated by the statutory rules is in violation of the- rules 
and in negation of Arts. 14 & 16 of the Constitution. 
E 
F 
Recruitment rules/Executive instructions must comply with Articles 14 
& 16 of the Constitution. 
Distinction between relaxation of 'rules of recruitment' and 'conditions 
of service'. 
The Respondents No. 1 to 6 were appointed as lecturers on ad-hoc 
basis in different disciplines of medical education on different dates 
between 12.12.1986 and 12.5.1988. The Govt. relaxed the rules of recruit· ' 
ment and appointed on regular basis the respondents No. 1 & 2. The 
appointment of respondents No. 1 & 2 as well as that of the respondents 
no. 3 to 6 was challenged. The respondents in turn filed writ petitions for 
directions to regularise there services. A single judge quashed the appoint-
G ment of respondents no. 1 & 2 on regular basis holcJing that the Govt. 
neither have power to relax the rules .or recruitment nor have power. to 
regularise their appointment. The appointments of other respondents were 
also quahsed as being ultra vires the Jammu & Kashmir Medical Education 
(Gazetted) Services Recruitment Rules, 1979. The Govt. was directed to fill 
up the posts through Public Service Commission within 3 months and till 
H then the respondents were to continue. The respondents were allowed to 
900 
J & KP.S.C. v. NARINDER MOHAN 
901 
be considered for regular recruitment. 
A 
On appeal, the Division Bench held as the Rules provide for appoint-
ment of ad-hoc lecturers, their appointments were according to Rules; that 
the respondents are qualified to hold the posts; that the Govt. has no power 
to relax the rules of recruitment; that the respondents are not members of 
the service since they were not recruited according to the Rules; it, however, B 
directed regularisation of the service cf the respondents in consultation 
with the Public Service Commission for appointment as lecturers. 
Three Appeals were preferred against the impugned judgment and 
order of the Division Bench : One by Public Service Commission; other by C 
one Dr. 'VR' who sought his appointment as lecturer and also sought 
setting aside of the appointment of the respondent; and another by the 
State. 
Allowing the Appeals, this Court, 
HELD : 1. ~e executive power is co-extensive with legislative power 
of the State and under Article 162, the State can create Civil posts and fdl 
them up according to executive instructions consistent with Arts. 14 and 
D 
16 or the Constitution. rt is settled law that once statutory rules have been 
made, the appointmt-nt shall be only in accordance with the Rules. 1ht: E 
executive power could be exercised only to fill in the gaps but the instruc-
tions cannot and should not' supplant the law, but would only supplement 
the law. (908-C-D] 
2. Having made the rules the executive cannot fall back upon its 
general power- under Article 162 to regularise the ad-hoc appoin~ents F 
under the Rules. (908-E] 
3. The establishment of an independent body like PsC, is to ensure 
selection of best available persons for appointment to a post to avoid 
arbitrariness and· nepotism in the matter of appointment. Commission is 
constituted by persons of high ability, varied experience and of undisputed G 
integrity and further assisted by ~rts on the subject. Whenever the 
Government is required to make an appointment to a High Public Office, 
it is required to consult the PSC. The selection has to be made by PSC and 
Government bas to fill up costs by appointing those selected and recom-
mended by the Commission, adhering to the order of merit in the list of H 
902 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
candidates sent by the PSC. The selection by the Commission, however is 
only a recommendation of the Commission and the final authority for 
appointment is the Government. [909-E-G] 
Jatinder Kumar v. State of Punjab, [1985) 1 SCR 899, relied on.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.