Cadre strength and deputation rules upheld as a valid exercise of rule-making power, with no Article 14 or 16 violation.

Rule 4(2)(c) and Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Excise Service (General Branch) Rules, 1974 were upheld as a valid exercise of the Government's rule-making power under Article 309. The Court found that the rules lawfully permitted determination of cadre strength from time to time, maintenance of a minimum number of encadred posts, and deputation appointments to non-encadred posts. As no material showed arbitrariness or discrimination against departmental officers, the challenge based on Articles 14 and 16 failed and the rules were held constitutionally valid.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rule 4(2)(c) and Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Excise Service (General Branch) Rules, 1974 were unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India because they permitted fixation of a minimum cadre strength and appointment of officers on deputation to non-encadred posts.

Analysis: The Rules vested the Government with authority to determine the strength of posts from time to time, create, abolish, or keep posts in abeyance, and to maintain a minimum of four encadred posts of District Excise Officers. The encadred posts were to be filled in accordance with the prescribed promotional procedure, while non-encadred posts could be filled on deputation. The power to regulate cadre strength and deputation appointments was treated as a policy choice within the Government's rule-making authority under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. No material was shown to establish that the fixation of cadre strength or the deputation arrangement was arbitrary or discriminatory as against departmental officers.

Conclusion: Rule 4(2)(c) and Rule 13 were held to be valid and not violative of Articles 14 or 16 of the Constitution of India, and the challenge to the rules failed.

---