Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.27 seconds)Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961
Section 2 in The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
State Of Gujarat & Another vs Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni & Others on 27 January, 1983
In so far as the case of State of Gujarat and another v. Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni and others (supra) is concerned, the facts whereof would reveal that the Gujarat Panchayat Act, which came into being in 1961, aimed at democratic decentralization of important governmental functions by vesting such functions in Gram, Nagar, Taluka and District Panchayats and by enabling the State Government to transfer other powers, functions and duties to the Panchayat Institutions. As a result of introduction of the Act, the District Local Boards under the Bombay Local Boards Act stood transformed as District Panchayats, Village Panchayats under the Bombay Village Panchayats Act as Gram Panchayats and Municipalities under the Bombay District Municipal Act and Bombay Municipal Borough Act as Gram or Nagar Panchayats, depending on the population, the officers and servants in the employ of the District Local Boards, Old Village Panchayats and Municipalities were deemed to be transferred to the service of the District Panchayat, new Gram Panchayats and interim Panchayats respectively and allocated to Panchayat service. A single centralized Panchayat service was constituted which was to be distinct from the State service. The Panchayat service consisted of District cadre, Taluka cadre and Local cadre. The Taluka and District Development Officers were officers of the State Government. Although benefits relating to equation of posts, promotions, fixation of pay scales and revision thereof were extended to the district and taluka cadres, the State Government did not make any order in that regard for the staff in the local cadre. Being aggrieved, certain ex-municipal employees, who were included in the local cadre, filed a writ petition in the High Court, which was allowed holding that the members of the Panchayat service belonging to the local cadre were government servants and issued consequential directions for equation of posts, revision of pay scales and payment of salaries. Against that judgment, an appeal came to be filed before the Honble Supreme Court, but during the pendency of the appeal, the Gujarat Panchayat(Third Amendment) Act,1978 was enforced with a view to nullify the basis of the decision of the High Court. The ex-municipal employees included in the local cadre thereupon also filed the writ petitions before the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the Amending Act. The facts of the case further reveal that the duties which the members of the Gujarat Panchayat service were required to perform were in connection with those affairs of the State which were entrusted to the Panchayat Institutions, by the statute itself or by transfer by the Government under the statute. The salary and allowances of the servants and officers of the Panchayat service were paid out of funds contributed or lent by the Government or raised by the discharge of an essential governmental function. The mode of recruitment, whether by examination or otherwise, the powers in respect of appointments, transfers and promotions of officers and servants and disciplinary action which may be taken against them, were to be regulated by the Rules made by the Government. The provisions regarding allocation to the Panchayat Service from a State service and reallocation from Panchayat service to the State service under various sections were consistent with the Panchayat service also being a service under the State. The provisions further revealed that the servants were not of the individual Panchayat but belonged to a centralized service. Panchayat service is one singe service with the State as the master. By the Amending Act of 1978, Secretaries, officers and servants of Gram and Nagar Panchayats, who were allocated to the Panchayat service from the ranks of the ex-municipal employers, were sought to be meted out differential treatment from the other members of the Panchayat service, more particularly the Secretaries, officers and servants of Gram and Nagar Panchayats, who were drawn from the rank of Secretaries, officers and servants of old Village Panchayat, that is the Talatis and Kotwals, who were government servants. They were deprived of their status as members of a service under the State without giving any option. Retrospectivity was sought to be given to the Amending Act so as to nullify their claims as government servants. The amendments necessitated to get over the judgment of the Gujarat High Court that the Panchayat service is a State service. The status of government servants achieved by the ex-municipal employees, who had been allocated to the Panchayat service, it was held by the Supreme Court on the facts as mentioned above, could not be extinguished by the Amending Act, so long as the posts were not abolished and their services were not terminated in accordance with the provision of Article 311 of Constitution of India. Nor was it permissible to single them out for differential treatment in violation of Article 14.
Ravindranath Pai & Anr vs State Of Karnataka & Anr on 20 February, 1995
9. We have carefully gone through the two judicial precedents cited by the applicant, but, on facts, find no parity whatsoever with the present case. We may reiterate that the present is a case where three cadres were separate. They got merged. Merger was found to have created chaotic situation. This Tribunal in Original Application bearing No.22/2010 observed that while de-merging the three Cadres, status quo ante has been restored. The applicant on de-merger has gone to the cadre to which he belonged before merger. It is not even the case of the applicant that some favourable conditions that may have been made available to him due to merger would be taken away with de-merger or that he shall be discriminated in any manner vis-`-vis officers of other two cadres. The facts of K.Ravindranath Pai & Anr. Vs. State of Karnataka & Anr.s (supra) would reveal that the appellants before the Supreme Court, who would challenge the order of Tribunal, were initially diploma-holders in engineering. They were recruited as Supervisors in the year 1960 and 1961 in the Public Works Department of Karanataka State. Later, they acquired degree in civil engineering and graduation in 1967 and 1970 respectively. At the time of their recruitment, recruitment rules envisaged that only degree-holders were entitled to be appointed as Junior Engineers, whereas diploma-holders could be appointed as Supervisors. In 1969 this position was changed and both the cadres of Junior Engineers and Supervisors were merged into one cadre of Junior Engineers. This was followed by an order of the Karnataka State in 1971 extending identical pay scales with retrospective effect from 01.01.1957 to both graduate and diploma-holder junior engineers. The Karnataka State by another order dated 09.01.1974 sought to bifurcate the service into two cadres, namely, Junior Engineer (Division-I) and Junior Engineer (Division-II). The former cadre was to comprise of degree-holders and the latter of diploma-holders. This bifurcation of cadres was given effect retrospectively w.e.f. 03.07.1969 and was sought to be supported by an enactment called the Karnataka State Civil Services (Classification and Scale of Pay of Non-graduate Junior Engineers of the Public Works Department) Act, 1975 being Act 9 of 1975. The Act provided for classification and scale of pay admissible to non-graduate Junior Engineers of the Public Works Department of the State of Karnataka. By virtue of provisions contained in Section 2 of the said Act, the posts of non-graduate Junior Engineers were declared to have existed with retrospective effect from 01.11.1956, whereas by sub-section 2(1)(ii) of the said Act, it was provided that the scales of pay admissible to such non-graduate Junior Engineers were to be only those specified for such category of posts and not those admissible category of Junior Engineer graduates. These scales were also given retrospective effect from 01.11.1956.