Gujarat High Court
Judgename :N.M.MIABHOY
BHAISHANKER AVALRAM JOSHI - Appellant
Versus
State of Bombay - Respondent
SECOND APPEAL 704 of 1960
Decided On : 06/24/1962
Constitution of India –Article 311 – Civil Procedure Code , 1908 – Section 80 - Government of India Act ,1935 –Section 240 - Bombay Reorganisation Act , 1960 – Section 60 ,61,64, 81 and 82 -Plaintiff was absorbed as a servant of that state - Subsequently he was transferred and on or about 1 of August 1952 he was promoted as a senior jailor - Later on he was transferred to Rajkot and demoted as an accountant - Was serving as an accountant in the Central Jail - Plaintiff appeared before that officer and cross examined the witnesses on whose statements the charges were leveled against him also examined himself and some witnesses - Allowed to appear through an advocate who took part in the enquiry proceedings - Enquiry officer made a report and thereafter on or about a notice was issued against the plaintiff calling upon him to show cause why he should not be dismissed from Government service - This order was subsequently amended by an addendum in which it was stated that the aforesaid order should be read so as to show that the plaintiff was dismissed from service on account of charge of accepting illegal gratification from prisoner having been conclusively proved against him in the departmental inquiries conducted against him by Government – Held, Fix the liabilities of the two States and not from the point of view whether a relief is main or incidental and in my judgment having regard to the provisions contained in sec. 60 and 61 the question in each case has first to be determined as to the genesis of the claim made against the State of Bombay - If the genesis is in breach of contract then the provisions of sec. 60 of the Act apply - The decree passed by the Appellate Court will be varied so as to show that the appellant continued to be in Government service till the date of the suit only and there will be a decree for Rs. 2 690 being arrears of pay due to the appellant upto the date of the suit - Rest of the appeal and cross-objections will stand dismissed - Each party to bear its own cost - Order accordingly.
( 1 ) THIS is a plaintiffs second Appeal. Plaintiff joined service in the Gondal State as a jailor in 1927. He was serving as a jailor at Gondal in 1948 when the State of Gondal merged with the United States of Kathiawar. Plaintiff was absorbed as a servant of that state. Subsequently he was transferred to Surendranagar in 1951 and on or about 1 of August 1952 he was promoted as a senior jailor. Later on he was transferred to Rajkot and demoted as an accountant. In 1953 he was serving as an accountant in the Central Jail at Rajkot. Whilst he was so serving charges were leveled against the plaintiff on the ground that in or about 1952 whilst he was serving Surendranagar he had committed certain defaults by misappropriation of food-stuffs mal-treatment of prisoners and acceptance of illegal gratifications from them. Plaintiff was suspended on 25th of March 1954 and on 27th of March 1954 he was served with a charge sheet making the aforesaid allegations against him. Plaintiff filed a written statement on the 4th of September 1954 and an enquiry was held by Mr. Gangopadhyaya a superior officer. Plaintiff appeared before that officer and cross examined the witnesses on whose statements the charges were leveled against him also examined himself and some witnesses. He was allowed to appear through an advocate who took part in the enquiry proceedings. Then the enquiry officer made a report and thereafter on or about 7th of January 1955 a notice Ex. 13 was issued against the plaintiff calling upon him to show cause why he should not be dismissed from Government service. That notice was in the following terms:- -TO shri Bhaishanker A. Joshi accountant Rajkot Central Prison (Under suspension) charges framed against you under this office No. C/14 dated 27-3-54 and in particular the charge of having accepted illegal gratification from prisoner Ratilal Jivan have been established to the satisfaction of Government. You are hereby asked to show cause. why the punishment of dismissal from service should not be inflicted upon you. You should please submit your reply to this office through the Superintendent. Rajkot Central Prison within a week from the date of receipt of this letter without fail. Sd/m. J. Bhatt inspector General of Prisons government of Saurashtra.
( 2 ) PLAINTIFF appeared in response to this notice and filed his written-statement Ex. 14 on 9th of January 1955. It is not disputed that the Inspector General of Prisons Government of Saurashtra was the officer competent to appoint and dismiss the plaintiff. That officer by his order Ex. 15 dated 4th of February 1955 passed the impugned order. The officer ordered that plaintiff should be dismissed from service forthwith. This order was subsequently amended by an addendum dated 9th of February 1955 in which it was stated that the aforesaid order should be read so as to show that the plaintiff was dismissed from service on account of charge of accepting illegal gratification from prisoner Ratilal Jivan having been conclusively proved against him in the departmental inquiries conducted against him by Government. On 7th of May 1956 plaintiff served the Government with a notice under sec. 80 Civil Procedure Code. Thereafter he filed the present suit on 13th of November 1956 from out of which this Second Appeal arises. In this suit plaintiff prayed for a declaration that the order dated 4th February 1955 of the Inspector general of Prisons dismissing him was illegal and void on the ground that it contravened the provisions contained in Article 311 clause (2) of the Constitution of India. Plaintiff also prayed for a decree for Rs. 2 690 being arrears of his pay from 1st of April 1954 to 7th of May 1956. Plaintiff also prayed for a mandatory injunction calling upon the State of Bombay which had in the mean while taken the place of the State of Saurashtra to reinstate him to his position as a Government servant.
( 3 ) THE main ground on which plaintiff attacked the order of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.