DR. L.P. AGARWAL versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: [1992] 3 S.C.R. 567 · Decided: 21-07-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KULDIP SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

-
DR. L.P. AGARWAL 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS; 
[l<ULDIP SINGH AND DR. A.S. ANAND, JJ.] 
JULY 21, 1992 
Civil Service-All India Institute of Medical Sciences Regulations, 
1958--R.egulations 30(2), 30(3) 35 read with Rule 56(i) of the Fundamental 
Rules-Post of Director, AIIMS-Tenure post-"Tenure''--Constmction 
A 
B 
-Retirement before completion of tenure-Legality of. 
C 
The appellant was appointed as Director, AIIMS, with effect from 
18.2.1979 for a period of five years or till he attained the age of 62 years 
whichever was earlier. With effect from 19.2.1980 he was confirmed in the 
said post. 
On 24.11.1980 the appellant was prematurely retired from service in 
public interest by giving him three months pay and allowances, in lieu of 
notice. 
D 
The appellant challenged the order of the Institute-Body filing a writ E 
--{ 
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the H~gh 
Court. 
The respondents contended before the High Court that the appellant 
was retired under Regulation 30(3) of the All India Institute of Medical 
Sciences Regulations, 19S8 in public interest after he attained the age of F 
SS years; that Fundamental Rule S6(j) was also applicable to the All\\fS 
f-- -
employees by virtue of Regulation 3S of the Regulations; that even if 
Regulation 30(3) was not attracted, the Institute had the power to prema-
turely retire the appellant, in public interest, under Fundamental Rule 
56(j); and that despite the fact that the appellant was on a tenure post G 
there was no bar to prematurely retire him by invoking either Regulation 
30(3) of Fundamental Rule S6(j). 
The appellant on the other hand contended before the High Court 
that the post of Director of the AIIMS is a tenure post under the Recruit-
ment Rules of the Institute and he was appointed to the said post by way H 
567 
568 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1992] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
of direct recruitment; that his tenure could not be cut short by bringing in 
the concept of superannuation or premature retirement which was alien 
to a tenure post. 
B 
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, against which the 
present appeal by special leave was filed before this Court. 
The appellant reiterated the contentions made by him before the 
High Court, in this appeal. 
On the question, "whether the incumbent of the post of Director, 
C AIIMS could be pematurely retired before the completion of his tenure?" 
Allowing the appeal of the employee-doctor, this Court, 
HELD 1.01. 'Tenure' means a term during which an office is held. It 
is a condition of holding the office. Once a person is appointed to a tenure 
y 
' 
')-
-
post, his appointment to the said office begins when he joins and it comes 
1-.. 
D 
to an end on the completion of the tenure unless curtailed on justifiable 
grounds. Such a person does not superannuate, he only goes out of the 
office on completion of his tenure. The question of prematurely retiring 
him does not arise. [577F] 
E 
F 
1.02. Under the Recruitment Rules the post of Director of the AIIMS · 
is a tenure post. The said rules further provide the method of direct recruit· 
merit for filling the post. These service-conditions make the post of Director 
a tenure post and as such the question of superannuating or prematurely 
retiring the incumbent of the said post does not arise. The age of 62 years 
provided under proviso to Regulation 30(2) of the All India Institute of 
Medical Sciences Regulations, 1958 only shows that no employee of the 
AIIMS can be given extension beyond that age. This has obviously. been 
done for maintaining efficiency in the Institute-Services. [577C] 
1.03. Simply because the appointment order of the appellant men-
. )-
G tions that "he is appointed for a period of five years or till he attains the 
age of 62 years", the appointment does not cease to be a tenure-post. Even 
an outsider (not an existing employee of the AIIMS) can be selected and 
appointed to the post of Director. Can such person be retired prematurely 
curtailing his tenure of five years? Obviously not. The appointment of the 
.~ 
appellant was on a five years tenure but it could be curtailed in the event 
H of his attaining the age of 62 years before completing the said tenure. The 
-
DR. AGARWAL v. U..0.1. [KULDIP SINGH, J.] 
569 
High Court failed to appreciate the simple alphabet of the service A 
jurisprudence. [577D-E] 
1.04. Concept of superannuation which is well understood in the 
service jurisprudence is alien t

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