J. K. VASAVADA & ORS. versus CHANDRAKANTA CHIMANLAL BHAVSAR & ANR.

Citation: [1976] 1 S.C.R. 499 · Decided: 28-08-1975 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A. ALAGIRISWAMI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

~ 
,. 
' 1 
~· . ' i 
499 
A 
J. K. VASA VADA & ORS. 
v. 
CHANDRAKANTA CHIMANLAL BHAVSAR & ANR. 
August 28, 1975 
B 
[A. ALAG!RISWAMI, N. L, UNTWALIA ANDS. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, JJ.J 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
States Reorganisation Act, 1956-Sec. 115(7)-B'onibay States Reorganisa· 
tion Act, 1960-Sec. 81(!'b) and Sec. 87-Change in conditions of service to the 
disadvantage of allotted 
governn1erlt 
c111ployces-Approval of the 
Central 
Govern1ne11t _1111der earlier Re.·'organisation Act--Circufar of Central Govern• 
1nent dated I Ith May, 1957. 
The appellants and the respondents were originally servants of the Sta·1e of 
Bombay and were allotted to the State of Gujarat on its formation on 1st of 
May, 1960. 
The State of Gujarat issued certain orders in the year 1962 and 
thereafter which P'rovided that 
passing of G.D.C. & A. 
examination was 
necessary for the purpose of getting a promotion to the higher grades. It also 
provided that persons v.1ho were already promoted would lose their incremen.ts 
and in sonle cases further increments \Vere stopped unless they passed the said 
examination. 
The respondents filed a Writ 
Petition in the High 
Court '?f 
Gujarat challenging the validity Of the said orders on the ground that the said 
orders varied the conditions of service of the respondents to their disadvantage 
without the approval of the Central Government. 
The respondents contended 
Jhut they had passed all the prescribed departn1ental examinations, as required 
by the Rules of the State of Bombay. 
The High Court of Gujarat struck 
down the said orders ort the ground that they varied the conditions· of service 
of the a1lotted employees to their disadvantage without the approval of the 
Central Government. 
' 
On appeal by special leave, it was contended by the appellants : 
(1) In view of the circular of 1957, the conditions of service of the em~ 
ployeeS of the then Bombay States in so far as promotion is concerned could 
have been varied to their disadvantage. The said right of the State of Bombay 
was available to the State of Gujarat. 
(2) No circular similar to the 1957 circular was required to be issued under 
s. 81(6) of the Bombay State Reorganisation Act. 
The respondent<> contended that the circular issued on 11th May 1957 was 
unde.r the States Re?~ganisation Act of 1956 and cannot. therefore, apply in 
relation to the prov1s1ons of the Bombay States Reorganisation Act of 1960 
which came into force subsequently. 
' 
Allowing the appeal, 
HELD : ( 1) The condition of service applicable to the emnlovees of the 
State of Bombay included not merely the rules made under the proviso to Art. 
309 of the Constitution. 
It also included a liabilitv to be subjected to any 
other rule that might be made under that nroviso till ls.t ,May 1960- by the 
State of Bon1bav. 
The reorganised State of Bornbav could have made rules 
making the G.n.c·. & A. examination a nccessarv qualification for promotion 
even though there was no such rule 
earlier. 
Therefore thf" 
condition-. of 
servicr of the servants of the reorganised State of Ron1baY befo:re 1st of May 
1960 included a condition that thcv \Voulcl be subject to anr ·nlle made by 
that State in rei;;pect of their promotion. 
f503-AB, DFl 
(2) The power granted to the 
reorganised State of 
Dombav should be 
deemed .. to accrue to the successor States, that is, the States of Maharashtra 
and Guiarnt. f503El 
(3) ~~tion 87 of the Rombav State Reorganisation Act, 1960 nrovfde, that 
the provISions of Part II cJf the State Act shall not be deemed to have effected 
500 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1976] I S.C.R. 
any change in the territories to which any Jaw in force immCdiately before 
A 
the appointed day extends or applies. 
Section 2(d) of the said Act defines 
"law'' a-, including any enactment. Ordinance Regulation. order, bye-law rule, 
scheme, notification or other instn1ment having the force of law in the wh0Ie or 
in any part of the State of Bombay. 'fhe circular of 11th May 1957 was, there-
fore, law, and \vould, therefore, continue to be in force in the new States of 
M aharasptra and Gujarat. 
The Gujarat Government, therefore, even in terms 
of the c!fcular of the Central Government dated I Ith ~1ay 1957 was competent 
to n1akc the rnle~ which they made in 1962 thereafter. 
[5030-H, 504A-l3] 
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1856 of 1970. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 
24th June, 1969 of the Gujarat High Court in S
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.