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

1990 Supreme(SC) 89

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KULDIP SINGH AND V. RAMASWAMI, JJ.
Ratilal B. Soni and others, Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No.1012 of 1987, D/- 16-2-1990.
Advocates appeared :
Mr. B. Datta, Sr. Advocate, Mr. P. H. Parekh and Ms. Shalini Soni, Advocates with him, for Appellants; Mr. T.U. Mehta, Sr. Advocate and Mr. M. N. Shroff, Advocate with him, for Respondents.
* B.L.P.A. No. 259 of 1986, D/- 24-9-1986 (Guj).

Advocates:
B.DUTTA, M.N.SHROFF, P.H.Parekh, SHALINI SONI, T.U.Mehta

Headnote:

Gujarat Panchayat Act - Section 206A(2) – Service matter - Panchayat Service - Cadre of Circle Inspectors - Deputation to higher cadre of Circle Inspectors - Whether facts of this case appellants have a right to be absorbed in cadre of Circle Inspectors - Appellants were originally appointed as Talatis in Revenue Department of State of Gujarat - Under Act which came into force with effect from April 1, 1963, Panchayat Service was constituted and under Act all posts of Talatis along with incumbents stood transferred to Panchyat Service - On that date there was a cadre of Circle Inspectors in State Service which was bifurcated and 50% of posts continued in State Service and remaining 50% were transferred to Panchayat Service - Appellants were sent on deputation as Circle Inspectors in State Cadre – Held, Any officer or servant who is not reallocated under sub-section (1) and continues in Panchayat Service immediately before expiry of aforesaid period of four years, shall on such expiry, be deemed to be finally allocated to Panchayat Service - It is clear from above quoted provision that a Panchayat servant who is not reallocated within a period of four years from April 1, 1963 would be deemed to be finally allocated to Panchayat Service - High Court has held that appellants have not been able to show that they made any such options before March 31, 1967 - Even if it is assumed that appellants gave some sort of option same having not been accepted before March 31, 1967, appellants stood finally allocated to Panchayat Service - Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

KULDIP SINGH, J. :- The appellants are in the cadre of Talatis-cum-Mantries (Patwaries) in the Panchayat Service of the State of Gujarat. In the year 1982/83 they were sent on deputation to the higher cadre of Circle Inspectors in the State service. The, question for consideration is whether in the facts of this case the appellants have a right to be absorbed in the cadre of Circle Inspectors.

2. The appellants were originally appointed as Talatis in the Revenue Department of the State of Gujarat. Under the Gujarat Panchayat Act (hereinafter called the Act) which came into force with effect from April 1, 1963, Panchayat Service was constituted and under the Act all the posts of Talatis along with the incumbents stood transferred to the Panchyat Service. On that date there was a cadre of Circle Inspectors in the State Service which was bifurcated and 50% of the posts continued in the State Service and the remaining 50% were transferred to the Panchayat Service. The appellants were sent on deputation as Circle Inspectors in the State Cadre. In January 1986 qualified officials became available for promotion to the post of Circle Inspectors in the State cadre and as such the appellants were reverted to their parent cadre of Talatis in the Panchayat service. The appellants challenged the reversion by way of writ petition in the Gujarat High Court primarily on the ground that their, options for absorption in the State service were pending with the State Government which the State was bound to decide in their favour. The High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that there was nothing on the record to show that the appellants gave any option to be absorbed in the State cadre. The High Court also found that they, being on deputation, have no legal right to be absorbed in the State Service. This appeal by special leave is against the judgment of the High Court.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The State by a circular dated February 8, 1965 asked the Talatis among others to give their options as to whether they want to remain in the Panchayat Service or to be reallocated to the State Service. S. 206A(2) of the Act is as under:

"Any officer or servant who is not reallocated under sub-section (1) and continues in the Panchayat Service immediately before the expiry of the aforesaid period of four years, shall on such expiry, be deemed to be finally allocated to the Panchayat Service."

4. It is clear from the above quoted provision that a Panchayat servant who is not reallocated within a period of four years from April 1, 1963 would be deemed to be finally allocated to the Panchayat Service. The High Court has held that the appellants have not been able to show that they made any such options before March 31, 1967. Even if it is assumed that the appellants gave some sort of option the same having not been accepted before March 31, 1967, the appellants stood finally allocated to the Panchayat Service.

5. The appellants being on deputation they could be reverted to their parent cadre at any time and they do not get any right to be absorbed on the deputation post. We see no infirmity in the judgment of the High Court and as such we dismiss the appeal. There shall be no order as to costs.

Appeal dismissed.

For Citation : AIR 1990 SC 1132

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