RANJIT PRASAD SINHA versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANOTHER

Citation: [1987] 3 S.C.R. 523 · Decided: 16-07-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.S. PATHAK · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
RANJIT PRASAD SINHA 
v. 
A 
STATE OF BIHAR & ANOTHER 
JULY 16, !987 
[R.S. PATHAK, CJ, RANGANATH MISRA AND 
B 
K.N. SINGH, JJ.] 
Ciiil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930-
Rules 14, 18 and 57(5 )-Read with Constitution of India-Art. 235-
Right of appeal against imposition of penalty-Whether accrues to a 
member if a Prorincial Serrice in the absence of a notification 1sS11ed 
under r. 18. 
C 
Rule 14 of the Civil Services Rules, 1930 classifies Public Servic"' 
in India into a number of categories and one such category is 
constituted of the 'Provincial Services'; and. r. 18 thereof declares that 
it shall consist of such services under the administrative control of the 
D 
Local Government of a Governo(s Province as the Local Government 
may from time to time declare, by notification in the local Official 
Gazette, to be included in the Provincial Services of that Province. Rule 
~9 specifies the penalties which could be imposed upon the members of 
the Services specified in r. 14. Rule 56 read with sub-r. (5) of r. 57 
confers on a person belonging to any of the classified services specified 
E 
in r. 14 a right of appeal to the Governor against an order imposing any 
of the penalties specified ii\ r. 49, which right is saved by Art. 235 of the 
Constitution. 
The appellant, a member of the Bihar Judicial.Service, challenged 
an order of punishment served on him inter alia on the ground that the 
F 
appeal filed by him to the Governor against the order of punishment 
should not have been withheld by the High Court but should have been 
despatched to the State Government for consideration. The High Court 
dismissed the writ petition holding that no appeal lay to the State 
Government. 
Dismissing the appeal, 
HELD: In the absence of positive material providing that 
the Subordinate Judicial Service can be regarded as having been 
brought within the scope of the Civil Services Rules of 1930, it is not 
open to the appellant to rely on the right of appeal created by those 
Rules. [525G] 
523 
G 
H 
-----------
524 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1987] 3.S.C.R. 
A 
In this case, neither counsel was able to refer to any notifica-
tion designating the Subordinate Judicial Service, of which the 
appellant was a member. as one of the Provincial Services specified in 
r. 14. [525F-G] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3534 
B 
of 1986. 
_. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.2.1986 of the Patna High 
Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6215 of 1985. 
Govind Mukhoty, S.K. Bhattacharya and U.S. Prasad for the 
C 
Appellant. 
D 
Jaya Narain, R.P. Singh, B.P. Singh and Ranjit Kumar for the 
Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court wa~delivered by 
PATHAK, CJ. This appeal by Special Leave is directed against 
the Judgment and Order of the High Court of Patna dismissing a Writ 
Petition filed by the appellant. 
The appellant is an Additional Subordinate Judge in the Bihar 
E Judicial Service. Disciplinary proceedings were taken against him and 
ended in an order imposing the punishment of censure, the withhold-
ing of annual increments for two years, postponement of his case for 
promotion for a like period and the denial of emoluments in excess of 
the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension. The appellant 
filed a Writ Petition in the High Court challenging the order of punish-
F 
ment on several grounds but did not succeed. He urged also that the 
appeal filed by him to the Governor against the order of punishment 
should not have been withheld by the High Court but should have 
been despatched to the State Government for consideration. The High 
Court held that no appeal lay to the State Government and therefore 
rejected the plea. 
G 
On 16 September, 1986 this Court granted special leave to the 
appellant confined to the question whether an appeal lay to the Gover-
nor against the order of the High Court. That is thP, sole question for 
consideration before us. 
H 
To support his claim to a right of appeal the appellant relies on 
-
• 
" 
\ 
i 
R.P. SINHA v. STATE OF BIHAR [PATHAK, CJ.I 
525 
..... 
the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal} Rules 1930. It 
A 
is pointed out that these Civil Services Rules of 1930 have been kept in 
force by the State Government by notification No. IIl/RI/101163-8051-
A dated 3 July, 1963 issued under the proviso to Article 309 of the 
Constitution. The submission of the appellant is that the right of ap-
peal is saved by Article 235 of the Constitut

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