S. PRATAP SINGH versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB

Citation: [1964] 4 S.C.R. 733 · Decided: 02-09-1963 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.K. DAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 19 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

.. , 
-
-
' 
4 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
733 
S. PRAT AP SINGH 
v. 
THE STATE OF PUNJAB 
(S. K. DAS, K. SOBBA RAO, RAGHUBAR DAYAL, N. RA-
JAGOPALA AYYANGAR AND J. R. MuoHOLKAR, JJ.) 
Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952, 
rr. 3, 26(d), 8, 15-Grant of leave-Power to revoke-Date 
of 
I.eave preparatory to retiren1ent-lf date of retirement-Conimuni-
cation of revocation after retirement-When effective-Right 
to 
retire-Restriction on-Constitution of India, 1950, 
Arts. 19 and 
23-V alzdity of r. 326( d). 
Tape Record of Conversations-ff legal 
evidence-Weight 
of. 
Government-Order of revocation of leave and suspe:is.·on of 
Civil Servant-Potver exercised mala fide and on extraneous con-
siderations-High Court-Jurisdiction to interfere under Art. 226 
of the Constitution. 
The appellant \Vas a civil surgeon in the employ1nent of the 
State of Punjab having joined the Punja!.> Civil Medical Service 
in 1947. 
In 1956 he was posted to jullunder where he remained 
till he proceeded on leave preparatory to retirement sometin1e 
in 
December 1960. His leave was sanctioned on December 18, 1960, 
and \Vas notified in the Punjab Gazette dated January 27, 
1961. 
On June 3, 1961, the Governor of Punjab passed orders suspend-
ing the appellant \Vith im1nediate 
effect and 
revoking 
his 
leave as the Governn1ent had decided that a departmental enquiry 
be instituted against him under s. 7 of the Punjab Civil Services 
(Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952. 
The Governor 
further 
passed an order under r. 3.26( d) by \vhich "A government ser-
vant under suspension on a charge of misconduct shall not 
be 
. . . . . . . . . . . . permitted to retire on his reaching the date of com-
pulsory retiren1ent but should be retained in service 
until 
the 
enqui;y into the charge is concluded and a - final order is passed 
thereon." The order under r. 3.26(d) was that in view of 
the 
appellant's reaching the age of superannuation on June 16 1961 
h.e should be retained in service beyond that date till the ~01nple~ 
tlon of the departmental enquiry. 
These orders reached the ap-
pella.nt, ac~ording to .him, only on June 19, 1961, but they were 
published 10 the Pun1ab Governn1ent Gazette Extraordinary dated 
June 10, 1961. 
By a writ petition filed under Art. 226 of 
the 
Constitution of India before the 
High Court of Punjab, the ap-
pellant challenged the. leg~lity of the orders of suspension, revo-
c~tlon of .lea\:e, :etent1on 1n service after the date of superannua-
~1on an~ 1nstitutton of the departmental enquiry, on the grounds 
inter a/ta, ( 1) that the rules governing his service did not em-
pow7r the Governor to pass the impugned orders, and (2) that 
the impugned orders were passed ma/a fide by or at the instance 
1963 
September 2 
1963 
S. P<alap Singh 
v. 
The State of 
Puniab 
734 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1964] 
of the Chief Minister, who was in-charge of the department of 
Health and who 'vas personally hostile to him by reason of cer· 
tain incidents, and that the orders were promoted by the desire 
on the part of the Chief Minister to wreak personally his vengeance 
on the appellant. 
HELD : (i) Under r. 8.15 of the Punjab Civil Services (Pu-
nishment and Appeal) Rules there is no restriction on the power 
of revocation of leave with respect to the time when it is to be 
exercised, and the authority empowered to grant leave has the dis· 
cretion to revoke it even after the officer to whon1 leave had been 
sanctioned had proceeded on leave. 
(ii) The date from which a Government servant is on leave 
preparatory to retir.:n1ent cannot be treatCd as the date of his re· 
tirement from service, and an order of suspension of the Govern-
ment servant during such leave is valid. 
(iii) Though the orders of suspension and revocation dated 
June 3, 1961, were actually com1nunicated to the appellant only 
after the date of his retirement, since he was on leave the said 
orders were effective frOm the 1noment they were issued. 
Bachhittar Singh v. State of Punjab, A.LR. 1963 S.C. 395 and 
State of .Punjab v. Sodhi Sukhdev Singh. [1961] 2 S.C.R. 371, dis-
tinguished. 
(iv) The appe.llant had no absolute right to opt for retire-
ment on his attain~ng the age of superannuation, that any such 
option was subject to r. 3.26( d) which applied to him and that 
his case came under that rule as he was on the date of his com-
pulsory retirement under suspension on charges of misconduct. 
( v) Whenever any charge of miscond
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.