RAJENDRA NARAIN SINGH AND OTHERS versus STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS

Citation: [1980] 3 S.C.R. 450 · Decided: 11-04-1980 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.C. GUPTA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
450 
RAJENDRA NARAIN SINGH AND OTHERS 
v. 
STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS 
April 11, 1980 
(A. C. GUPTA AND E. S. VENKATARAMIAH, JJ.] 
Cc,nstitution of India 1950--Art 309 Proviso State Government whetht!r can 
negulate its public ~ervice in exercise of its executive power. 
Bihar Police Service (Recruitment) Rules 1~53-Scope of. 
Fixing of inter-se seniority of promotees and direct recruits on basis of 
continuous officiation by promotees-Whether valid. 
The appellants were appointed Inspectors of Police in 1953. After working 
as Inspectors for about 12 years, they were promoted by notification dated 
June 16, 1965 to officiate as Deputy Superintendents of Police. Before pro-
motion they were subjected to the scrutinies prescribed by rules 22, 23 and 
24 of the Bihar Police Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1953. 
Rule 648-B of the 
Bjhar and Orissa Police 1{anual 
(Volume I) requires a 
promoted Deputy 
Superintendent of Police to pass an examination in accounts. The appellants 
passed the examination and satisfied all the 
requirements 
for 
confirmation: 
However, 
the posts in which they were officiating \Vere temporary posts.' 
Thereafter the 
Government by 
a notification dated August 22, 
1974, 
confirmed the appellants and other similarly situated officers as Deputy Super~ 
intendents of Police with effect from the dates which according to tJ;tese officers 
were arbitrarily chosen. 
On September 1, 1974 the Government published a 
combined gradation list in which these promotees were placed even below the 
direct recruits who were appointed in 1974. 
The appellants challengeJ this 
gradation list in the High Court by a Writ Petition and during the pendency 
of the said Writ, the State Government constituted "Saran Singh Committee", 
F \ to assess the promotional prospects of different State services, examine the 
problem of "stagnation", and suggest remedial measures. The 
recommenda~ 
tions of the committee were accepted by the State Government by Resolution 
dated April 11, 1977. In the Writ Petiti9n, the High Court directed the State 
G 
H 
· Government to re-examine the matter and prepare a fresh gradation list on 
the basis of 1he statement made by the Government in the light of the com-
mittees' recommendations. 
None of the parties appealed against this order. 
By notification dated January '7, 1978 the State Government appointed on 
probation the Officers who had been officiating in' those posts with effect from 
tbe dates mentioned against their names in the notification and the notification 
issued previously promoting these officers on officiating basis 
was cancelled. 
The dates from 1which these officers were said to have been appointed on pf'Ow 
bation were the dates of their promotion as officiating Deputy Superintendents 
of Police. The names of the appellants figured against serial numbers 23, 
24 and 25 in the list given in the notification dated January 7, 1978. The 
revised gradation list which is under challenge was thereafter issued. 
•
•• 
•
I
•
I
' 
JL 
-~ 
• 
R. N. SINGH V. BIHAR 
451 
The a,>pcllants questioned the correctness of the Judgment of the 
High 
A 
Court which allowed the two Writ Petitions made by two different groups of 
direct recruits challenging the gradation 1ists of permanent Deputy Superinten-
dents of Police on February 24, 1978. 
Accepting the appea1, 
HELD: 1. The appellants were promoted to officiate as Deputy Superin-
B 
tendents of Police in the year 1965 (other promotees like the appellants had 
also been officiating as Deputy Superintendents of Police from different dates 
between 1948 and 1970), and by the 'Government order dated December 30. 
1977 fifty-four temporary posts of Deputy Superintendent of Police created 
bet\\·een 1948 and 1970 were made permanent from the dates these posts were 
created. [4560-G] 
2. It is well settled that in the absence of any legislation on the subject, 
C 
or a mle framed under the Proviso to Articl~ 309 of the 
Constitution, the 
State Government can regulate its public services in the exercise of its executive 
power. [456 F-G] 
B. iV. 1Vagarajan v. State of Mysore [1966] 3 SCR 682, Sant Rani Shanna 
v. State of Raiasthan [1968] I SCR 111, referred, to. 
3. There i~ no statute or any role framed under the Proviso to Article 309 
to determine the seniority as between the direct recruits and the promotees. 
The determination of seniority on the basis of continuous officiation bas been 
held valid in S. B. Patwardh

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