Statutory recruitment rules override manual instructions, and promotions secured under a final judgment cannot be withdrawn later.

Statutory recruitment rules framed under Article 309 governed promotion to Assistant Engineer once they came into force, displacing the earlier administrative instruction in paragraph 206 of the Post and Telegraph Manual. The accompanying memorandum of 28 June 1966 required year-wise lists and seniority within the same recruitment year on the basis of earlier qualification. Promotions already secured under an earlier final judgment were protected and could not be withdrawn merely because later decisions took a different view; the reversion order was therefore unsustainable. In the implementation dispute, contempt was not pursued because the record showed bona fide difficulty arising from conflicting views, and directions were issued to implement the judgment according to law.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether, after the coming into force of the recruitment rules and the memorandum issued on 28 June 1966, promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer had to be governed by the statutory procedure and not by paragraph 206 of the Post and Telegraph Manual; (ii) whether promotions already granted under an earlier final judgment could be unsettled by later decisions and a reversion order could be sustained; (iii) whether contempt proceedings were warranted for non-implementation of the earlier decision.

Issue (i): Whether, after the coming into force of the recruitment rules and the memorandum issued on 28 June 1966, promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer had to be governed by the statutory procedure and not by paragraph 206 of the Post and Telegraph Manual.

Analysis: The recruitment rules framed under Article 309 introduced a statutory regime for promotion to the service, requiring selection through a departmental qualifying examination and preparation of an approved list by the Departmental Promotion Committee. The memorandum of 28 June 1966 further prescribed that separate lists be prepared year-wise for recruitment and that officials of the same recruitment year who qualified earlier would rank en bloc senior. Once the statutory rules came into force, the earlier administrative instruction in paragraph 206 of the Manual could not override or continue to govern the field.

Conclusion: The statutory recruitment rules and the memorandum of 28 June 1966 governed the field, and paragraph 206 of the Manual had no continuing force after the rules came into operation.

Issue (ii): Whether promotions already granted under an earlier final judgment could be unsettled by later decisions and a reversion order could be sustained.

Analysis: The earlier judgment in favour of the concerned employees had attained finality and the benefit already flowing from it had been implemented. A later reinterpretation by other forums could not reopen that settled position so as to take away promotions already granted. The reversion was founded on subsequent divergent views and not on any legally sustainable basis capable of displacing the earlier final benefit.

Conclusion: The reversion could not be sustained, and the promotions already granted pursuant to the earlier final judgment were protected.

Issue (iii): Whether contempt proceedings were warranted for non-implementation of the earlier decision.

Analysis: The record showed bona fide difficulty arising from conflicting judicial views and uncertainty in implementation. In those circumstances, initiating contempt was considered unnecessary, while directions were issued to proceed in accordance with the judgment and complete promotions within the stipulated time.

Conclusion: Contempt was not pursued, and the proceedings were dropped.

Final Conclusion: The common decision affirmed the statutory promotion regime, preserved the benefits already secured under the earlier final judgment, set aside the reversion, and declined to proceed with contempt while directing implementation in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: When statutory recruitment rules and a binding administrative procedure occupy the field, they supersede earlier executive instructions, and a promotion already secured under a final judgment cannot be withdrawn merely because of later conflicting decisions.

---