B. N. NAGARAJAN AND ORS. versus STATE OF MYSORE AND ORS.

Citation: [1966] 3 S.C.R. 682 · Decided: 01-03-1966 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 17 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

B. N. NAGARAJAN AND ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF MYSORE AND ORS. 
March I, 1966 
[P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, c. J., K. N. WANCHOO, 
M. HIDAYATULLAH, J.C. SHAH 
A?\D S. M. SIKRI, JJ.] 
Constitatlon <>f India, Ari. 309, proviso-Scope of. 
Mysore State Civil Services (General Recruitmenl) Ru/ts 1957 r. J-. 
Provision for service rules to be mod• for each servict-Whether in 
ab.fence o/ such niles has effect of suspending e.xecutl>"e power of S11#e 
wuler Art. 162 to makt! service appointments. 
Mysore Public Works, 
Engineering 
Deparlment Services (Rtcruit-
ment) Rules 
1960-Considered-Mysore 
Public 
Service 
Commission 
(Functions) Rules, 1951-Whethtr statutory rules under Ari. 309. 
By notifications issued in October 1958, May 1959 and April 1960, 
the Mysore Public Service Commission invited applications for the re-
cruitment of 80 probationary Assistant Engineers. The 
quali.flcatiom, 
pay, age limit and other conditions for eligibility were prescribed by 
ihese notifications. 
On March I, 1960, it was notified by the Governor, that for direct 
recruitment to appointments and posts in the services of the State, re-
servations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes would be !511'o 
and 3 % ; and the reservation for other 
backward 
classes 
would 
be 
259'. 
Thereafter, in October and November 
1960, the 
Mysore 
Public 
Service Commi~•ion intervi-"wed 
the candidates 
and sent a list to the 
Government of 80 candidates selected by them. 
On December 3, 1960, the Government of Mysore sanctioned ti» 
establishment of the State Service Cadre in respect of the Mysor> Public 
\Vorks Engineering Department Service. 
On the same date, in exercise 
of the powers conferred by the proviso to Art. 309 the Governor made 
the rules called the 
Mysore Public Service 
Engineering 
Departmmt 
Service (Recruument) Rules 1960. These Rules prescribed in respect 
of each category of specified posts the methods of recruitment, whereby 
only 40% of the appointment could be made after an intcrvi-ew and an 
oral test and also prescribed the minimum qualifications, age limita, 
etc. 
for Assistant Engineers which were somewhat different from thoeo 
prescribed in the earlier Notifications of the Mysore Public Service Com-
mission relating to the recruitment of 80 A;;sistant Engineers. 
On October 23, 1961 the Governor mado cenain amendments to !he 
1960 Rules the effect of which W3'' to make those rules retrospectift 
wilh effect from March I. 1958 :md also to waive the requirements ol 
the rule• relating to the percentages for direct recruitment, educational 
qualifications. and age requirement., etc. in respect of direct recruitment 
of Assi<tant Engineers for the first time. 
Thereafter, on October 31, 1961, the Governor appointed 88 candi-
datec; as probationary Ac;c;istant 
Engineers. These appointments 
'INTO 
challenged in 16 Writ Petition. filed in the High Court on the ~rouads 
inter a/la, that (i) in view of Rule 3 of the Mysore Stale Civil Servioeo 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
/ 
. 
' 
I !' 
I 
' 
• 
• 
' f' 
'-• 
A 
B 
c 
D 
G 
H 
NAGARAJAN v. MYSORE (Sikri, J.) 
683 
(General Recruitment) Rules, 1957, which provid~d that. the method of 
recruitment and qualifications for each State .C1v1l S<:""ce shall . be set 
forth in the rules of recruitment of such service specially made 10 that 
behalf, the Government could not recruit the Assistant Engineers without 
framing the necessary rules; (ii) 
the State Government 
could not 
make rules retrospectively unless it had express powers to do so under 
the rele\'ant statute; (iii) the appointments which were made on <?ctober 
31 1951 had to be made in accordance with the 1960 Rules but m fact 
w~re not so made; (iv) some of the appointments were made ma/a fide. 
These writ petitions were allowed by the High Court. 
On appeal to this Court, 
HELD : The appointments of the 88 Assistant Engineers were validly 
made in the exercise of the executive power of the State under Art. 
162 of the Constitution. 
It is not obligatory under the provise> IC> Art. 309 le> make rules e>f 
recruitment etc. 
before a service can be constituted or a post created 
or filled. 
The State Ge>vernment has executive power in relation IC> all 
matters with res~ IC> which the Legisla!Ure of the State ha& power to 
make laws. 
It follows from this that the State Government will llave 
executive power in respect of List II Entry 41 "State Public Services". 
1686 C-EJ 
In this background, Rule 3 of the General Recruitment Rules of

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.