SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(SC) 209

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
M.H. BEG, C.J.I., A.C. GUPTA AND P.S. KAILASAM, JJ.
P. Chitharanja Menon and others, Appellants
Versus
A. Balakrishnan and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 1547 of 1975,
D/- 25-4-1977.
Advocates Appeared
Mr. Y. S. Chitale, Sr. Adv., (Mr. A. S. Nambair, Advocate with him), for Appellants; Mr. K. T. Harindranath, Sr. Adv. (Mr. K. R. Nambiar, Adv. with him), (for Nos. 1, 3 and 4) and Mr. T. S. Krishnamoorthy Iyer Sr. Adv., (Mr. N. Sudhakaran, Adv. with him), (for Nos. 5 and 6), for Respondents.

Advocates:
A.S.NAMBIYAR, K.R.NAMBIAR, K.T.Harindernath, M.SUDHAKARAN, T.S.KRISHNAMURTHY IYER, Y.S.Chitale

Headnote:

Constitution Of India,1950 - Promotion - Quash - Certiorari calling for records relating and quash same and to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents who are State of Kerala represented by Chief Secretary Government of Kerala and Director of Panchayats to forbear implementation and further direct them to implement grading list or alternative to issue a writ of mandamus directing State of Kerala to consider and dispose and similar representations by respondents on merits- It was also prayed that a writ of certiorari quashing so far it related to petitioners and respondents in writ petition be issued and also to issue a writ of mandamus compelling respondents State of Kerala and Director of Panchayats to assign writ petitioners appropriate ranks in cadre of Executive Officers in Panchayat Services- High Court allowed writ petition and set aside list dismissing appeal petition and directed that a fresh list be prepared in accordance with principles laid down light of judgment of High Court Aggrieved by decision of High Court appellants have preferred this appeal – Held, Court in judgment under appeal took a different view decision under appeal proceeds on basis that a regrettable mistake crept into judgment and earlier decision proceeded on basis that there was a III Grade mentioned - High Court was of view that there was a III Grade GO- above referred to earlier decision missed fact that these Grades were not applicable was not placed before us we are not sure whether there was any mistake in earlier judgment refers to persons being transferred from Malabar District Board as Panchayat Executive Officers III Grade- Be that as it may we are satisfied that respondents are not entitled to reliefs prayed for by them in writ petitions as appellants were promoted to a higher post before respondents were integrated into Government service - Further throughout appellants have been treated as occupying a higher post and respondents much lower post- Though promotion of appellants was before and was confirmed by various orders of Government respondents herein did not choose to challenge orders till- In circumstances we are satisfied that order of Kerala High Court has to be set aside and appeal is allowed with costs - Appeal allowed

Judgment

KAILASAM, J. - This appeal is by special leave granted by this Court against the judgment of the High Court of Kerala in O.P. No. 5566 of 1972 by respondents 4 to 8 and 13 before the High Court.

2. The respondents herein filed the writ petition for the issue of the Writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to Ex. P-10, GO Rt. No. 3386/69 DD dated 23-10-1969, Ex. P12 and Ex. P15 and quash the same and to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 who are the State of Kerala represented by the Chief Secretary Government of Kerala, and the Director of Panchayats to forbear the implementation of Ex. P12 and further direct them to implement Ex. P-8 grading list or in the alternative to issue a writ of mandamus directing the State of Kerala to consider and dispose of Ex. P. 13 and similar representations by respondents 3 and 4 on merits. It was also prayed that a writ of certiorari quashing Ex. P17 in so far as it related to the petitioners and respondents 3 to 18 in the writ petition be issued and also to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the respondents 1 and 2 State of Kerala and the Director of Panchayats to assign the writ petitioners the appropriate ranks in the cadre of Executive Officers in the Panchayat Services. The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the list Ex. P17 the order Ex. P12 and the order Ex. P15 dismissing the appeal petition Ex. P14 and directed that a fresh list be prepared in accordance with the principles laid down in Ex. P16 in the light of the judgment of the High Court Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court the appellants have preferred this appeal.

3. The writ petition was contested by 18 respondents. Respondents 3 to 10 were Panchayat executive officers of the Malabar area functioning under the Madras Village Panchayat Act, 1951, on 31st December, 1961. Respondents 11 to 18 were Panchayat Officers functioning as such on 31st December, 1961 under the Travancore-Cochin Panchayats Act, 1950. The Keraln Panchayats Act 1960, Act 32 of 1960, received the assent of the Governor on 8th December, 1960, and was published in Kerala Gazette Extraordinary No. 119 dated 9th December 1960. It is common ground that the respondents became Government servants on and from 1st January, 1962. On 15th May, 1961, under Ex. P1 the Government passed an order that all Panchayat Officers/executive officers who continue to hold their appointments at the time when the Act came into force will be absorbed as Panchayat executive officers in the new Panchayats. The same order provided that the staff of the Malbar District Board shall be absorbed as Panchayat executive officers in suitable grades according to their qualifications, grades and suitability.

4. In December, 1961, 17 Panchayat officers were to be appointed on a scale of pay higher than the scale applicable to the Panchayat executive officers. The Public Service Commission selected 17 Panchayat executive officers who were on the scale of pay Rs. 80-150 and drew up a list on 27th December 1961. They were appointed as Panchayat Inspectors under Ex. P8 on 20th December. 1961. To fill up these vacancies 17 of the Panchayat executive officers who were in Grade II on the scale of pay Rs. 40-120, the respondents 3 to 18 were appointed. The 5 appellants before us were appointed as executive officers on the grade I Rs. 80-150 as and from 1st January 1962.

5. The respondents who were the petitioners in the writ petition were integrated in the service. The Government passed orders laying down the principles of integration of the District Board employees and the Panchayat executive officers and Panchayat Officers. The impugned orders under the writ petition are Ex. P10. Ex. P12 and Ex. P15. It is also prayed that Ex. P17 may be quashed. The Government in Ex. P10 came to the conclusion that the vacancies on the advice of the Public Service Commission and the appointment of those that had been advised on 28th December, 1961, arose only on






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top