STATE OF BIHAR versus DR. YOGENDRA SINGH COL. (RETD.) AND OTHER

Citation: [1982] 3 S.C.R. 332 · Decided: 01-03-1982 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.N. BHAGWATI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

• 
A 
332 
STATB OF BIHAR 
p, 
DR. YOGBNDRA SINGH COL. (RBTD.) 
ANDOTHBR 
(P.N. BHAGWATI AND R.S. PATHAK, JJ.) 
March 1, 1982 
C 
Bihar Private Medical Col/ege1 (Taking over) Act 1978-Meaning and 
D 
• 
E 
G 
H 
effect of sections 3 ond 6, explained, 
Dr. Yogendra Singh ·col was appointed Professor of Surgery in the 
Magadh Medical College and as per ·the !Regulations of the University he was 
entitled to continue in service until be reached the age of superannuation, which 
was fixed at 62. Pursuant to the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 6 of the 
Bihar Private Medical Colleges (Takmg Over) Act, 1978, the State Government 
appointed a Screening Committee which, inter aJia, recommended the retirement 
of all teachers beyond the age of 58 years and their re-empolyment upto the age 
of 62 years only if there were no qualified substitutes available. On 11-9-1980, the 
Principal of the Magadh College, based on the circular dated 3-9-1980 issued by 
the State Government, after accepting the recommendation of the Screenihg 
Comniittee, issued a notice to Dr. Col. informing him that bis services will be 
terminated with effect rrom 10-10-1980. A writ petition filed in the High Court 
of Patna challenging the said order of termination of his services was allowed by 
the High Court taking the view that by virtue of sub-section (3) of section 3, the 
obligation to continue Dr. Col in service upto the age of 62 years devolved on 
the State Government on the taking over or the Magadh Medical College under 
sub-section (1) of section 3 and the State Government had no power under sub-
section (3) of section 6 to terminate bis services prior to his attaining the age of 
superannuation and hence the order dated 11-9-1980 was invalid. 
Allowing the appeal of the State, the Court 
HELD 1:1. The terinination of the service of Dr. Col. was perfectly valid. 
Quite apart from the power expressly conferred under sub-section (3) of section 
6, the State Government would have power to terminate the services of any person 
employed on an ad hoc basis. [339!G-H, 340 A] 
1:2. It is elementary that when a person is appointed on an ad hoc basis 
his tenure is precarious and be cannot claim to continue in service until the age 
of superannuation. From and after the date of notification under sub-section (1) 
of section 3 of the 1978 Act Dr. Col. continued to serve the Magadh Medical 
College on an ad hoc basis in terms of the proviso to sub-section (l) of section 6 
which declared tbat the staff employed in the CoHege "shall continue to servo 
the college on an ad hoc basis till a decision under sub-section (3) and (4) is taken 
by the ~tat~ Government.'.' lq view of th~ clear and cxpli>il 1~rm1 of sub· 
BlHAR v. VOGENDRA SJNGH 
333 
section (I) of section 6 providing that as Crom the date or the notification issued, 
undersub-section (I) or sect ion 3, "all the staff employed in the college shall 
cease to be employees of the college body", the contract of Dr. Col with tho 
owners of the Magadh Medical College under the letter of appointment given to 
him did not devolve on the State Government but came to an end and he became 
the employee or tho State on an ad hoc basis, disentling him to the benefit or 
retirement at tho ago or 62. (338 C-G) 
It was within the competence or the Screening Committee to make recom-
mendation in regard to the age of superannuation of the teaching staff of the 
medical colleges iaken over by the State Government. Sub-section (2) or section 
6 undoubtedly provides that the Committee or exports appointed under that 
provision will examine the bio-data of each member of the staff and ascertain 
whether appointment promotion or confirmation of such person was made in 
accordance with the University Regulations and in keeping with the guidelines-
laid down bY. the Medical Council or India and will also take into consideration 
all othe_r relevant material including length of service in the college and submit 
its report to thC State Government. But sub-section (3) of section 6 also makes 
it clear th at the Committee of experts appointed eunder sub-section (2) of that 
section can make recommendations in regard to "rank, pay, allowances and other 
conditions or service" of tho teaching staff. [338 H, 339 A-CJ 
3. The State Government Was clearly within its powers under sub-
section (3) of section 6 to re-determine the age Of superannuation and to pro~ide 
that the services or all the teachers in the medical col
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.