Civil Appeal No 43NT of 1975
306 From the Judgment and Order dated 2311974 of the Gujarat High Court in Income Tax Reference No 78 of 1970
TA Ramachandran Mrs J Ramachandran and SC Patel for the Appellant
CM Lodha MN Tandon and Ms AS Subhashini for the Respondent
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATACHALIAH J
This appeal by the assessee The Alembic Chemicals Works Co Ltd arises out of and are directed against the judgment dated 2311974 of the High Court of Gujarat in Income Tax Reference 78 of 1970 answer ing in favour of the Revenue a question of law referred to it under Section 2561 of the Income Tax Act 1961 Act by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal
On 861961 the assessee a company engaged in the manufacture of antibiotics and pharmaceuticals was granted licence for the manufacture on its plant of the well known antibiotic penicillin
In the initial years of its venture the assessee was able to achieve only moderate yields from the pencillin producing strains used by it which yielded only about 5000 units of penicillin per millilitre of the culturemedium
In the year 1963 with a view to increasing the yield of penicillin the assessee negotiated with Ms Meiji Seika Kaishna Limited Meiji for short a reputed enterprise engaged in the manufacture of antibiotics in Japan which agreed to supply to the assessee the requisite technical know how so as to achieve substantially higher levels of performance of production of more than 10000 units of penicillin per millilitre of cultured broth  with the aid of better technology and process of fermentation and with better yielding penicillin strains developed by Meiji
The negotiations culminated in an agreement dated 9101963 whereunder Meiji in consideration of the once for all  payment of 50000 US dollars then equivalent to Rs239625 agreed to supply to the assessee the sub cultures of the Meiji s most suitable penicillin producing strains the technical information know now and written description of Meiji s process for fermentation of penicil lin alongwith a flow sheet of the process on a pilot plant the design and specifications of the main equipments in such pilot plant arrange for the visits to and training at assessee s expense 307 of technical representatives of the assessee to Meiji s plant at Japan and to advise the assessee in the large scale manufacture of penicillin for a period limited to 2 years from the effective date of the agreement
It was also stipu lated that the technical know how supplied by Meiji was to be kept confidential and secret by the assessee which was prohibited from parting with the technical know how in favour of others or to seek any patent for the process
In the proceedings for assessment to Income tax for the assessment year 1964 65 the assessee claimed that Rs239625 paid under the agreement to Meiji  was one laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business and claimed its deduction as a revenue expenditure
The Income tax Officer on the view that the expenditure was for the acquisition of an asset or advantage of an enduring benefit held it to be a capital outlay and declined the deduction
This view was affirmed by the Appellate Asst
Commissioner in the assessee s first appeal
The Income tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench dismissed the further appeal of the assessee holding that the arrangements with Meiji envisaged the setting up of a large commercial plant for the production of the antibiotic modelled on the lines of the pilot plant and that there fore the out lay could not be treated as an expenditure laid out on and for purposes of the existing business but must be regarded as one incurred for a new venture on a new process with a new technology on a new type of plant
The Tribunal held that the payment was once for all payment  and was made for the acquisition of a capital asset
The Tribunal inter alia held The sub cultures and the information design and flow sheet etc were to be fur nished once for all
Meiji also agreed to advise the assessee in respect of any diffi culty the assessee may encounter in applying the subcultures and informations obtained by the assessee from Meiji to the large scale manufacture of penicillin
It is apparent from the agreement and the correspondence which has been made available to us that Meiji agreed to give the designs etc not only for a pilot plant but for the manufacture of penicillin according to Meiji s process on commercial scale
The assessee has to put in a larger plant modelled on the pilotplant   
It is in consideration for Meiji s agreeing to 308 supply the assessee with complete details of the technical know how the design subcul tures flow sheet and written descriptions of the process once for all that the assessee paid to Meiji the stipulated sum of  50000   
It would thus appear that the payment was made for acquiring a capital asset in the shape of technical know how and other allied information
It was not made in the course of carrying out of an existing business of the assessee but was for the purpose of setting up a new plant and a new process
It would therefore appear that the revenue authorities have rightly treated the payment as of capital nature   
The process which the assessee took over from Meiji was not the same as it was working heretofore
In the present case the outlay was incurred for a complete replacement of the equipment of the business inasmuch us a new process with a new type of plant was to be put up in place of old process and old plant     Underlining Supplied 4
At the instance of the assessee the Tribunal stated a case and referred the fol lowing question of law for the opinion of the High Court Whether the sum of Rs239625 was a revenue expenditure admissible to the asses see for the purpose of computation of its total income The High Court by the judgment under appeal answered the question in the negative and against the assessee
This part of the judgment is assailed by the assessee in CA 43 of 1975
The reasoning of the High Court in support of its conclusion was on the following lines  
It is true that the expenditure was manifestly laid out for the purpose of obtain ing benefits and advantages such as sub cul tures of penicillin producing strains design of a pilot and exchange of technical personnel with a view to acquiring know how
But the finding of the Tribunal as we 309 read it is that all the benefits which asses see received under the agreement were as a part of the transaction which was undertaken with the ultimate view of a setting up a new plant and a new process
In view of the find ings recorded by the Tribunal no conclusion other than that the expenditure was incurred once and for all with a view to bringing into existence an asset or advantage for the endur ing benefit of the manufacturing trade of the assessee is possible
The expenditure was incurred for introducing a new process of manufacturing and with a view to installing a new plant even if not immediately then at a later stage and on that conclusion the only possible answer to the first question referred to us can be in the negative and against the assessee Emphasis Supplied Before the High Court the assessee also moved an application under Section 2562 of the Act ITA No 24 of 1971 for a direction to the Tribunal to refer another question of law also stated to arise out of the order of the Tribunal
The question of law respecting which the supplementary reference was sought was this Whether there was any evidence or material before the Tribunal to hold that 1 a completely new plant with a completely new process and new technical know how was ob tained by the assessee from Messrs Meiji under the said agreement dated 9101963 and 2 to work out that process separate plant or machinery had to be designed constructed installed and operated The High Court dismissed this application observing that the Tribunal had no where recorded a finding to the effect that a completely new plant was obtained by the assessee from Meiji and that the finding of the Tribunal that under the agreement the assessee had obtained a new process and a new technical know now from Meiji was not without evidence
Against the dismissal of ITA 24 of 1971 by the High Court the assessee has preferred Civil Appeal No 44 of 1975
On 2421987 this Court while directing the Tribunal to draw up a supplementary statement of the case and refer for the opinion of this Court the further question of law which according to the assessee arose out of the Tribu nal s order and which was the subject matter of the asses see s appeal in CA 44 of 1975 however disposed of that 310 appeal formally leaving the question of law arising out of the supplemental reference to be considered in the present appeal ie CA No 43 of 1975
The Tribunal has since sub mitted the supplementary statement of the case and has referred that question of law also
This is how both the questions of law are now before us
While in regard to the first question the correctness of the opinion rendered by the High Court requires to be examined the second question has to be answered for the first time as the reference is called by this court directly
We have heard Shri TA Ramachandran learned Senior Counsel for the assessee and Shri Lodha learned senior counsel for the revenue
In computing the income chargeable under the head Profits and Gains of Business or Profession section 37 of the Act  enables the deduction of any expenditure laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business or profession as the case may be
The fact that an item of expenditure is wholly and exclusively laid out for purposes of the business by itself is not sufficient to entitle its allowance in computing the income chargeable to tax
In addition the expenditure should not be in the nature of a capital expenditure
In the infinite variety of situational diversities in which the concept of what is capital expenditure and what is revenue arises it is well nigh impossible to formulate any general rule even in generality of cases sufficiently accurate and reasonably comprehensive to draw any clear line of demarcation
Howev er some broad and general tests have been suggested from time to time to ascertain on which side of the line the out lay in any particular case might reasonably be held to fall
These tests are generally efficacious and serve as useful servants but as masters they tend to be over exact ing
One of the early pronouncements which serves to indicate a broad area of distinction is City of London Contract Corporation vs Styles where Bowen LJ indicated that the out lay on the acquisition of the con cern would be capital while an outlay in carrying on the concern is revenue
In Vallambrosa Rubber Co vs Farmer Lord Dunedin suggested as not a bad crite rion  the test that if the expenditure is once for all  it is capital and if it is going to recur every year it is revenue
In the oft quoted case on the subject viz British Insulated Helsby Cables Ltd vs Atherton Viscount Cave LC said But when an expenditure is made not only once and for 311 all but with a view to bringing into exist ence an asset or an advantage for the enduring benefit of trade I think that there is very good reason in the absence of special circum stances leading to an opposite conclusion for treating such an expenditure as properly attributable not to revenue but to capital 8
In Assam Bengal Cement Co Ltd vs Commissioner of Income tax 195527 ITR 34 this Court observed If the expenditure is made for acquiring or bringing into existence an asset or advantage for the enduring benefit of the business it is properly attributable to capital and is of the nature of capital expenditure
If on the other hand it is made not for the purpose of bring ing into existence any such asset or advantage but for running the business or working it with a view to produce the profits it is a revenue expenditure The aim and object of the expendi ture would determine the character of the expenditure whether it is a capital expendi ture or a revenue expenditure In Sitalpur Sugar Works Ltd vs Commissioner of Income tax 1963 49 ITR SC 160 Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co Ltd vs Commissioner of Income tax and in Travancore Cochin Chemicals Ltd vs Commissioner of Income tax the enunciation made in Assam Bengal Cement Company s case  which in turn referred with approval to Lord Cave s dictum was affirmed
In Sun News Papers Ltd  Associated News Papers Ltd vs Federal Commissioner of Taxation  Dixon J while indicating that the distinction between revenue and capital corresponds with the distinction between the busi ness entity structure or organisation set up or established for the earning of profit on the one hand and the process by which such an organization operates to obtain regular returns on the other however went on to say that The business structure or entity or organiza tion may assume any of an almost infinite variety of shapes and it may be difficult to comprehend under one description all the forms in which it may be manifested   312 The learned judge further observed   
There are I think three matters to be considered a the character of the advan tage sought and in this its lasting qualities may play a part b the manner in which it is to be used relied upon or enjoyed and in this and under the former head recurrence may play its part and c the means adopted to obtain it that is by providing a periodical reward or outlay to cover its use or enjoyment for periods commensurate with the payment or by making a final provision or payment so as to secure future use or enjoyment    9
In Regent Oil Co Ltd vs Strick Lord Reid emphasised the futility of a strict application of and exclusive dependence on any single principle in the search for the true position and pointed out the difficulty arising from taking too literally the general statements made in earlier cases and seeking to apply them to a different case which their authors certainly did not have in mind
The Learned Lord also identified as another source of difficulty the tendency in some cases to treat some one criterion as paramount and to press it to its logical conclusion without proper regard to the other factors in the case
Lord Reid further said So it is not surprising that no one test or principle or rule of thumb is paramount
The question is ultimately a question of law for the court but is a question which must be answered in the fight of all the circumstances which it is reasonable to take into account and the weight which must be given to a par ticular circumstance in a particular case must depend rather on common sense than on strict application of any single legal principle
 The question in each case would necessarily be whether the tests relevant and significant in one set of circum stances are relevant and significant in the case on hand also
Judicial metaphors it is truly said are narrowly to be watched for starting as devices to liberate thought they end often by enslaving it
The non determinative quali ty by itself of any particular test is highlighted in BP Australia vs Commr
of Taxation of the Commonwealth of Australia Lord Pearce said The solution to the problem is not to be found by 313 any rigid test or description
It has to be derived from many aspects of the whole set of circumstances some of which may point in one direction some in the other
One considera tion may point so clearly that it dominates other and vaguer indications in the contrary direction
It is a common sense appreciation of all the guiding features which must provide the ultimate answer   Emphasis Supplied The idea of once for all  payment and enduring bene fit  are not to be treated as something akin to statutory conditions nor are the notions of capital or revenue a judical fetish
What is capital expenditure and what is revenue are not eternal varities but must needs be flexible so as to respond to the changing economic realities of business
The expression asset or advantage of an enduring nature was evolved to emphasise the element of a sufficient degree of durability appropriate to the context
The words of Rich J in Herring vs Federal Commissioner of Taxation 194672 CLR 543 dealing with an analogous provision in sec
51 of Income tax Assessment Act of Australia may be re called   
Lord Cave LC in using the phrase enduring benefit  in British Insulated and Helsby Cables Ltd vs Atherton 1926 AC 205213 HL was not thinking of advantages that are permanent
There is a difference between the lasting and the everlasting
The time over which the thing endures  is a matter of degree and one element only to be considered
Horses in the old days and motor trucks in these days are plant and their acquisition for the purpose of transport in business usually involves a capital expendi ture
But the horses were not immortal any more than the trucks have proved to be    10
Shri Ramachandran submitted that the approach to the question by the Tribunal was influenced by an erroneous assumption that Meiji s agreement envisaged the imperative of a totally new plant for the exploitation of Meiji s improved fermentation technology
Learned counsel invited our attention to the following passage in the order of the Tribunal where this postulate is found On the other hand a completely new plant with a completely new process and a completely new technical know how was obtained by the assessee from Meiji and it 314 was in consideration of obtaining this techni cal know how that the assessee made the pay ment of  50000 Shri Ramachandran submitted that the Tribunal had failed to take into account that even before the agreement the assessee had set up a plant for the production of penicillin at an out lay of more Rs66 lakhs and that the purpose of the agreement with Meiji was only to increase the yield of penicillin and that no new venture envisaging the setting up of a new plant was ever intended by the assessee
The pro duction of penicillin which was the established line of business of the assessee says learned counsel was to be improved upon with the use of an improved process of fermen tation with new penicillin producing strains isolated and developed by Meiji so as to increase the unit yield of penicillin per milli litre of the culture medium
The supply of the technical know how and the flow sheet of the process and the written description of the specifications of the pilot plant from Meiji were incidental to and for the effec tive exploitation of the high penicillin yielding strains of the culture to be supplied by Meiji
Learned counsel submit ted that the whole range of the operations envisaged by the agreement pertained to the area of the profit earning process and not the profit earning machinery or apparatus
The cost relationship between what was involved in the improvisation of the process and the investment on the plant did says counsel indicate that the extant profit earning machinery was not sought to be supplanted
Learned counsel also urged that there was no material for the Tribunal to hold that the use of new process and tech nology from Meiji amounted to a new venture not already in the line of the assessee s existing business or that it required the erection of a new plant discarding and sup planting the huge investment already existing
Learned counsel submitted that it was no body s case that with the introduction of the Meiji process of fermentation with improved penicillin strains the existing plant and machinery of over Rs66 lakhs had become obsolete and irrelevant or that the assessee had had to set up an altogether new plant to work out the improvised Meiji process of fermentation
Learned counsel for the Revenue however sought to maintain that all the criteria relevant to the question indicated that the assessee had acquired a new technical know how for a new process which required the setting up of a new plant
There was according to Shri Lodha a new venture based on a new technology and know how of unlimited duration which required a new plant for its commercial exploitation
There were according to Shri Lodha both the acquisition of 315 an enduring asset and the commencement of a new venture
On a consideration of the matter we are persuaded to hold that there was no material for the Tribunal to record the finding that the assessee had obtained under the agree ment a completely new plant  with a completely new process and a completely new technical know how from Meiji
Indeed the High Court recognised the fallacy in this assumption of the Tribunal that a completely new plant was obtained by the assessee though however the High Court attributed the inaccuracy to what it considered to be some inadvertence or misapprehension on the part of the Tribunal in that regard
But the High Court was inclined to the view that a complete ly new process and technical know how was obtained from Meiji under the agreement
Certain assumptions fundamental to and underlying the approach of the High Court are that the agreement dated 9101963 envisaged a new process and a new technology so alien to the extant infrastructure equip ment plant and machinery in the assessee s enterprise as to amount to an entirely a new venture unconnected with and different from the line of assessee s extant business
It is in that sense that the expense was held not incurred for the purposes of the day to day business of the assessee but for acquiring a new capital asset
The business of the assessee from the commencement of its plant in 1961 it is undisputed was the manufacture of penicillin
Even after the agreement the product manufac tured continued to be penicillin
The agreement with Meiji stipulated the supply of the most suitable sub cultures evolved by Meiji for purposes of augmentation of the unit yield of penicillin milli litres of the culture medium
Scientific literature on the bio synthesis of penicillin indicates that penicillin is derived from a fermentation process
Some penicillins are obtained from direct fermenta tion and some others by a combination of fermentation and subsequent chemical manipulation of the fermentation product
The manufacturing process it is stated consists of four processes Fermentation isolation chemical modifi cation and finishing
Referring to the common basis of commercial production of penicillin in the New Encyclopaedia Britannica Micropaedia Vol
VII it is mentioned penicillin antibiotic the discovery of which in 1928 by Sir Alexander Fleming marked the beginning of the antibioticera
Fleming observed that colonies of Staphylococ cus aureus the pus producing bacterium failed to grow in those areas of a culture that had been accidentally contaminated 316 by the green mold Penicillium notatum
After isolating the mold he found that it produced a substance capable of killing many of the common bacteria that infect human beings
This antibacterial substance to which Fleming gave the name penicillin was liberated into the fluid in which the mold was grown
This proc ess is the basis of all commercial production of penicillin    p 850 Emphasis Supplied In Encyclopedia of Chemical technology Kirk Othmer III Edn
2 it is found mentioned  
The specific characteristics of the industrial microbial strains media and fermentation conditions cannot be described in detail since these facts are considered trade secrets
The origin of strains and general principles of culture maintenance fermenta tion equipment innoculum preparation media and fermentation conditions for penicillin and cephalosporin production are public knowledge and are reviewed here
     Fleming s original strain of P notatum provided only low yields of penicillin   
Superior penicil lin producing strain of P chrysogenum have since been obtained by random screening of variant strains following mutation induction
All of the present day high yielding industri al strains are descendants of the NRRL 1951 strain   Once a high yielding strain has been isolat ed it is essential that the organism be maintained so that it remains viable and capable of producing the antibiotic at its original rate 54   
Under suit able conditions highyielding strains can be preserved for many years without loss of viability or antibiotic producing ability    p 899 90 We are inclined to agree with Shri Ramachandran that there was no material for the Tribunal to hold that the area of improvisation was not a part of the existing business or that the entire gamut of the 317 existing manufacturing operations for the commercial produc tion of penicillin in the assessee s existing plant had become obsolete or inappropriate in relation to the exploi tation of the new sub cultures of the high yielding strains of penicillin supplied by Meiji and that the mere introduc tion of the new bio synthetic source required the erection and commissioning of a totally new and different type of plant and machinery
Shri Ramachandran is again fight in the submission that the mere improvement in or updating of the fermentation process would not necessarily be inconsistent with the relevance and continuing utility of the existing infra structure machinery and plant of the assessee
It would in our opinion be unrealistic to ignore the rapid advances in Researches in antibiotic medical microbiology and to attribute a degree of endurability and permanance to the technical know how at any particular stage in this fast changing area of medical science
The state of the Art in some of these areas of high priority
research is constantly updated so that the know how cannot be said to be the element of the requisite degree of durability and none phemerality to share the requirements
and qualifications of an enduring capitalasset
The rapid strides in science and technology in the field should make us a little slow and circumspect in too readily pigeon holing an outlay such as this as capital
The circumstance that the agreement in so far as it placed limitations on the right of the assessee in dealing with the know how and the conditions as to non partibility confidentiality and secrecy of the know how incline towards the inference that the right pertained more to the use of the know how than to its exclusive acquisi tion
In the present case the principal reason that influ enced the option of the High Court was that the initiation and exploitation of the new process brought in their wake a new venture requiring an altogether new plant
We are afraid this view may not be justified
Clauses 2 4 and 6 of the agreement provide 2 For and in consideration of the subcultures design flow sheet and written description to be furnished by Meiji to ALEM BIC PURSUANT to paragraph 1 hereof Alembic shall pay to MEIJI in advance and in lump sum such as amount as MEIJI is able to collect Fifty thousand US Dollars  50000 net in Tokyo after deducting any taxes and charges to be imposed in India upon MEIJI with respect to the said payment to MEIJI
 318 4
MEIJI will give advice to the extent considered necessary be MEIJI on any diffi culty ALEMBIC may encounter in applying the subcultures and informations obtained by ALEM BIC from MEIJI to the large scale manufacture
The above provision shall be in force after MEIJI s receipt of the amount set forth in paragraph 2 hereof until the end of two 2 years from the effective date of this agree ment   6 Any of the subcultures and informations obtained by ALEMBIC from MEIJI shall be re garded as strictly confidential by ALEMBIC and its personnel and shall be used by ALEMBIC only in its Penicillin G plant in India and shall not be disclosed to any other person firm or agency governmental or private
Alembic shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that such subcultures and information will not be communicated
ALEMBIC shall take all possible precautions against the escape from its premises of the strain obtained from MEIJI of propagated therefrom
ALEMBIC shall not apply for any patent to any country in relation to any of the subcultures and information obtained by ALEMBIC from MEIJI As notified earlier the Tribunal in the course of its order held  
Meiji agreed to give the designs etc not only for a pilot plant but for the manufacture of penicillin according to Meiji s process on commercial scale
The assessee has to put in a larger plant modelled on the pilotplant Emphasis Supplied Having regard to the terms of Clause 4 of the agreement this conclusion is non sequitur
The improvisation in the process and technology in some areas of the enterprise was supplemental to the existing business and there was no material to hold that it amounted to a new or fresh venture
The further circumstance that the agreement pertained to a product already in the line of assessee s established business and not to a new product indicates that what was stipulated was an improvement in the operations of the existing business and its efficiency and profitability not removed from the area of the day to day business of the assessee s established enterprise
319 14
It appears to us that the answer to the questions referred should be on the basis that the financial outlay under the agreement was for the better conduct and improve ment of the existing business and should therefore be held to be a revenue expenditure
Reference may also be made to the observations of this Court in CITv
CIBA of India Ltd  at 705
There is also no single definitive criterion which by itself is determinative whether a particular outlay is capital or revenue
The once for all  payment test is also inconclusive
What is relevant is the purpose of the outlay and its intended object and effect considered in a common sense way having regard to the business realities
In a given case the test of enduring benefit  might break down
In Commissioner of Income tax Bombay vs Associated Cement Co Ltd JT 282 2 287 at 290 this Court said   
As observed by the Supreme Court in the decision in Empire Jute Co Ltd vs Com missioner of Income Tax 1980 124 ITRSCp 1 that there may be cases where expenditure even if incurred for obtaining an advantage of enduring benefit may none the less be on revenue account and the test of enduring benefit may break down
It is not every advantage of enduring nature acquired by an assessee that brings the case within the principles laid down in this test
What is material to consider is the nature of the advantage in a commercial sense and it is only where the advantage is in the capital field that the expenditure would be disallowable on an application of this test   15
In the result for the foregoing reasons the appeal succeeds and is allowed and the question of law referred to the High Court for its opinion in Income Tax Reference No 78 of 1970 is answered in the affirmative and against the revenue
The judgment under appeal is set aside
 Likewise the supplementary question of law raised in ITA 24 of 1971 before the High Court and now constituting the subject matter of the supplementary reference made by the Tribunal to this Court is answered in the negative and against Revenue
The appeal is accordingly allowed but with no order as to costs
GN Appeal al lowed


Summary:
The Haryana Public Service Commission advertised the filling up of 4 posts of District Food and Supplies Officers by direct recruitment and prescribed fivethree years  experience as an executive officer as one of the essential qualifications
The appellant who was working as InspectorSub Inspector in the Food and Supplies Department applied for the post
Some other InspectorsSub Inspectors also applied
Subsequently the Special Secretary to the Haryana Government in the Food and Supplies Department wrote to the Commission affirming inter alia that the work of InspectorsSub Inspectors of his Department was of executive nature though they were not officers
The Commission howev er required the appellants to produce a certificate from the State Government to the effect that they had the requi site experience of executive officer
The State Government did not issue such a certificate and in its absence the Commission did not consider the Inspector and Sub Inspector candidates as having the requisite qualification
Thereupon the appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court claiming that he had the requisite qualifica tion
The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition and the Division Bench dismissed the appeal therefrom
Before this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellant that the post of Inspectors and Sub inspectors belonged to the category of executive office and that in earlier years certain similarly situated Inspectors and Sub Inspectors of the Department had been appointed on that basis
438 Allowing the appeal it was HELD 1 It was conceded in the Department s letter to the Commission that the InspectorsSub Inspectors held executive posts
440B 2 None of the parties has placed any definition of the term Officer  from any Haryana Statute
It is also not the contention of any of the parties that the administrative orders gave a definition to the term
In such a situation the common parlance meaning of officer  has to be accepted for the purpose of finding out whether Inspectors and Sub inspectors held the pest of officer
440F 3 In service jurisprudence even ministerial employees have been referred to as officers
The terms Officer  and employee  put together obviously signify the grade of the establishment or post held the officer being higher in grade to employee
441G 4 A person invested with the authority of an office has been treated as an officer
441C D 5 Keeping in view the nature and duty assigned to the Inspector or the Sub Inspector working in the Department to whom powers have been delegated it cannot be doubted that the holders of pests of Inspector and Sub Inspector are officers
441G H GA Monterio vs The State of Ajmer  and Bajrang Lal  Anr
vs State of Rajasthan   referred to
6 The appellant was entitled to be considered for recruit ment in 1980 and since his claim had been over looked with out justification the State and the Haryana Public Service Commission are bound to consider his case now on the basis that he was entitled to recruitment in 1980
In case the appellant is found qualified be shall be selected for the post and duly appointed
442E