2002 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

Deptt.????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Director Animal Husbandry/ Poultry/. ??????????????????????????????????????????????? Live Stock/Disease Investigation ??????????????????????????????????????????????? Officer B‑18 in the Department with ??????????????????????????????????????????????? at least 12 years service in Grade B‑17 ??????????????????????????????????????????????? and above. The above Rules explicitly shows that for promotion to the post of Director Animal Husbandy four categories have been laid down which are eligible to be promoted, i.e. (i) Deputy Director Animal Husbandy (ii) Deputy Director Poultry (iii) Deputy Director Livestock and (iv) Disease Investigation Officer B‑18 in the department with at least 12 years service in Grade B‑17 and above. After the words "Deputy Director Animal Husbandry" the symbol "oblique" has been used. Similarly after the word "Poultry" the symbol "oblique' has been used. With the words "Livestock" though the symbol "oblique" has been incorporated but thereafter we find the words "Disease Investigation Officer B‑18" and even in this category the appellant does not fall as he neither claims nor he is a Disease Investigation Officer B‑

18. The interpretation put fourth by the learned counsel for the appellant that with the words Livestock Officer B‑18, Deputy Director should not be read is not tenable for the simple reason that soon before the word "Livestock" the symbol "oblique" starts. This shows that the symbol "oblique" used before the word "Livestock" refers to the words "Deputy Director Livestock". Any interpretation of the symbol "oblique" other than the above would be ridiculous and as such not tenable. The dictionary meanings of the word "oblique" as provided in Chambers 1st Century Dictionary are as follows:‑‑ "An oblique indicates alternative. Bring yours, swimming costume and/or a tennis racquet." This also shows that the symbol "oblique" is used in the sense of and/or as it indicates alternatives.

8. Another contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that for promotion to the post of Deputy Director the requirement laid down in the rules is as follows:‑‑ S.??? Name of?????? functional???? Name of????? Appointing????? Minimum????? Method of????? Age for initial?????? Examination No. Deptt.????????? Unit?????? ?????? the post????? Authority????????????? ????????? Qualification? recruitment???? recruitment?????? ? training & ??????????????????????????????????? ??????????? with???????? ????????????????????????for appoint‑??? ????????????????????????????????????????????????? other condi‑. ?????????????????????????????????????????? ???? grade??????? ???????????????????????? ment by:‑??????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????? tions requried ???? ????????????????????????????for confirmat? ??????????????????????????????????????????????? ?ion ??????????????? ????????? initial ??????????????????????????????? ????????? recruit? ??????????????????????????????? ????????? ment or ??????????????? ????????????????????????? transfer ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????? prom‑??????????????????????????????? ?????? Min Max ??????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????? otion

1. Animal Technical ?????????????? ??Deputy?? Govt.?????? Ph. D Dr. M.Sc. ????? As per i) 25% by initial Husban‑??????????????????? Director?????????????????? in the relevant???????? Column recruitment as per dary???????????????????????? Animal???????????????????? subject from a??? 8??? col.6 Deptt.????????????????????? Husbandary/???????????? recognized??????????????????????????????? ii) 7596 by promotion on the ??????????????????????????????? Poultry??????????????????? University with??????? basis of Selection on merit ??????????????????????????????? Livestock/??????????????????????????????? basic degree in????????? from amongst the officer hol. ??????????????????????????????? Disease???????????????????? Veterinary??????????????? ding ???????? posts of Assistant Dire ‑ ??????????????????????????????? Invest/‑??????????????????? Science and????????????? ctor Animal Husbandry/Pout ??????????????? gation????????????????????? Animal???????????????????? try Development Officer/ ??????????????? Officer???????????????????? Husbandr)???????????????? Sheep Development Officer/ ??????????????? B‑18??????????????????????? 2.5 years????????????????? Research Officer/Asstt. ??????????????????????????????? experience?????????????????????????????? Disease Investigation Off? ??????????????????????????????? respectively???????????? icer/sheep Livestock Officer ??????????????????????????????????????????????? Grade B‑17. holding the ??????????????????????????????????????????????? supervisory post with at ??????????????????????????????????????????????? least 5 years as such. By referring the aforesaid rule the learned counsel maintained that in that case the appellant who is a Livestock Officer B‑18 could not be considered to become Deputy Director as in the relevant rules the words "Livestock Officer Grade B‑17" have been used, whereas the appellant is holding the post of Livestock Officer B‑

18. The argument, on the face of it, is not tenable as the post of Livestock Officer Grade B‑17 has been upgraded to B‑

18. The relevant rules have not been challenged either before the Service Tribunal or before this Court. The Rules relating to service matter of appellant and respondent No.6 may be defective in so many aspects but we have to interpret the same as they are and not as they should be. To amend the relevant Rules is not the function of the Court. In the light of what has been stated above, we find no illegality in the impugned judgment passed by the Service Tribunal, the appeal, therefore, stand dismissed with no order as to costs. H.B.T./242/SC/AJ&K???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Appeal dismissed.