RAJENDRA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY versus ASHOK KUMAR PRASAD AND ORS.

Citation: [2009] 15 S.C.R. 1168 · Decided: 30-11-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

(2009) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 1168 
A 
RAJENDRA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY 
v. 
)cc(°'-. 
ASHOK KUMAR PRASAD AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 6937 of 2004) 
B 
NOVEMBER 30, 2009 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
c 
Bihar Agricultural Universities Act, 1987 - s. 36 - Statute 
made under - Provided for time bound promotion scheme for 
teachers - Statute assented to, by the Chancellor, but not 
published in the Official Gazette - Held: The statute did not 
come into effect and was not enforceable in absence of its 
D publication in the Official Gazette, which was mandatorily 
required in terms of s.36(4) - Moreso, the Chancellor withdrew 
~ 
his assent in respect of the said statute by a reasoned order 
- Consequently, respondents-teachers not entitled to benefit 
,.,, time-bound promotion scheme under the statute. 
E 
Appellant university was governed by the Bihar 
Agricultural Universities Act, 1987. The Board of 
Management of the University framed Statute providing 
for time bound promotion Scheme for its teachers. The 
Chancellor of the University gave his as!?ent in respect 
• 
F of the said Statute under section 36(2) of the Act .. 
However, the statute was not published in the Official 
Gazette, as the matter was under reconsideration. Later, 
on reconsideration, the Chancellor withdrew his assent 
in respect of the said statute holding that it was still-born, 
G non-est and never came into force for want of 
publication in the official Gazette. 
The respondents .. teachers filed writ petitions 
challenging the order passed by the Chancellor which 
H 
1168 
RAJENDRA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY v. ASHOK 1169 
KUMAR PRASAD AND ORS. 
was allowed by the High Court on the ground that once A 
..-.,. 
the Chancellor gave his assent to a statute under section 
36 of the Act, he did not have any power to recall the 
assent. It also held that publication of the new statute in 
the official Gazette was only a formality, and when th~ 
Chancellor gave his assent to the statute framed by the B 
Board of Management, a vested right was c·reated in the 
teachers employed by the appellant-University to receive 
time bound promotion in terms of the said statute and it 
could not be denied to them. 
The questions which thus arose for consideration in c 
the present appeals were: (i) whether, in absence of 
publication of the statute in the Official Gazette, as 
required by section 36 (4) of the Act, a statute made under 
section 36(1) and assented under section 36(2), came 
into effect and became enforceable and (ii) whether the D 
.,,. 
respondents were entitled to the benefit of Time-Bound 
Promotion Scheme. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD:1.1. Section 35 of the Bihar Agricultural E 
Universities Act, 1987 deals with and enumerates the 
topics on which statutes can be framed by the University. 
... 
Section 35(25) provides that subject to the provisions of 
" 
the Act, the Statutes may provide for the conditions of 
service, remuneration and allowances to be paid to F 
teachers employed under the University. Section 36 of 
the Act, on the other hand, provides how statutes are to 
-
be made. Section 36 lays down three steps for making 
or amending a Statute. They are: (a) the Statute should 
be made by the Board of Management in the manner G 
specified in sub-section (1); (b) the Statute should be 
approved and assented by the Chancellor and (c) the 
Statute so made and assented, shall be published in the 
official Gazette. [Paras 8 and 9] [1176-E-F; 1177-G-H; 
1178-A-B] 
H 
1170 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A 
1.2. When the Act lays down the manner in which a 
statute under the Act should be made, it shall have to be 
),,,,...... 
made in that manner and no other. The requirement that 
the statute should be published in the official Gazette, is 
an integral part of the process of 'statute making' under 
B section 36 of the Act. It is mandatory and not directory. 
Until publication in the official Gazette, the statute will be 
considered as still being in the process of being made, 
even if it had received the assent of the Chancellor. A 
'statute in the making' or a 'statute-in-process' is 
c incomplete and is neither valid nor effective as a statute. 
So long as the statute is not completely made, but is still 
in the process of being made, it can be cancelled or 
withdrawn or modified, without the need for 'publication' 
of such cancellation, withdrawal or modification. [Para 9] 
D [1178-8-F] 
1.3

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