STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus LAXMISHANKAR MISHRA AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [1979] 3 S.C.R. 630 · Decided: 29-03-1979 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.A. DESAI · Disposal: Dismissed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
c 
D 
E 
F 
H 
630 
.STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 
v. 
LAXMISHANKAR MISHRA AND ORS. ETC. 
March 29, 1979 
[D. A. DESAI AND A. P. SEN, JJ.) 
Madhya Pradesh Local Authorities School Teachers (Absorption in Govern-
ment Service) Rules, 1963, Rule 3(b)-lnterpretation of the words "should have 
worked on the post for a minin1um period of 7 years''. 
The Madhya Pradesh Local Authorities School Teachers (Absorption in 
Government Service) Act provided for absorbing teachers serving in Middle · 
Schools and Primary Schools managed by local authorities 
in Government 
service. 
The relevant rule for absorption enacted under the Act in rule 3 and rule 
3 (b) reod "" follows : 
"3(b) For absorption on the post of Head Master/Principal of a High/ 
Higher Secondary School, the person concerned should possess the 
poet graduate 
degree and should have worked on the post for a 
minimum period of 7 years in the same institution and should have 
10 years' teaching experience in any recognised institution of Madhya 
Pradesh". 
On the question of interpretation of the words "should have worked on 
the post for a minimum period of seven years" the High Court was of the 
view that the period during which a Head Master fPrincipal worked as inobarge 
Principal ought to be taken into account for computing the period of 7 years. 
Dismissing the special leave petitions by the State the Court, 
HELD : 1, While computing the period of 7 years for the 
purpose of 
rule 3 (b) what is determinative is performing duties and discharging functions 
of the post of Head Master /Principal irrespective of the c..apacity in whick the 
p~.at was hold. [635. CJ 
2. The absorption of a person as Principal under rnle 3 (b) does not depend 
on rank but on the nature of functions and duties that is incumbent disch&rges 
for a particular number of years (i.e.) the duties of a Principal for a period of 
seven years. The language, in the instant case, indicates emphasis 011 work 
being done while on the post irrespective of capacity. [635 B~CJ 
Ramrattan v. State of M.P. and Ors., I.L.R. 1964 M.P. 242; State of Madhya 
Pradesh v. Ookul Prasad, [1971] M.P.LJ. 609; Giria Shanker v. S.D.0. Barda 
and Or.•., A.I.R. 1973 M.P. 104; distinguished. 
3. On a pure grammatical construction of the expression. "should 
have 
worked on the post for a minimum period of seven years in the same institution", 
it is clear that the person claiming to be absorbed must have worked on the 
post of Head Master/Principal Of a HighjHigher Secondary School i0r a 
minim11m period of 7 years, the emphasis being on the experience gained by 
working on the said post. A person in charge of the post also worb and 
> 
• 
.j 
' 
( 
• 
•• 
• 
~·. 
• 
MADHYA PRADESH v. LAXMISHANKAR (Desai, J.) 
631 
di,.licharges the duties and functions of the post of which he has taken charge. 
A 
Even an officiating incumbent of the post does discharge the functions and 
duties of the post. If the rule expressly did not make 
any differentiation 
between the persons working as a confirmed holder of substantive post and an 
incharge or officiating holder of the post, there is nothing in the expression 
itself which by necessary implication excludes service in any other capacity 
except as a confirmed Hea<i Master/Principal in a substantive post. 
(633 D-E, G-HJ 
B 
Qonfirmation in a post being one of the glorious uncertainties of service as 
observed by this Court in S. B. Patwardhan's case, it is rational to believe that 
the framers of the rule did not want to attach any importance to the capacity 
in which the post is held but the emphasis was on working on the post meaning 
'thereby discharging 'the duties and performing the functions assigned 
to the 
' 
post. [634 C-D] 
C 
S. B. Patwardhan and Ors. etc. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (1977] 3 
SCR 775; applied . 
CML APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition (Civil) 
Nos. 4062-4066 of 1978. 
From the Orders dated 11-1-1978 of the Madhya Pradesh High 
Court in M.P. Nos. 390, 391, 393, 395 and 397 /75. 
AND 
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 4069 of 1978. 
D 
From the Order dated 5-1-78 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court 
E 
in M.P. No. 580/75. 
S. K. Gambhir for the Petitioners in all the S. L. Ps. 
The Order of the Court was delivered b_y 
DESAI, J. Mr. Gambhir, learned counsel 
for 
the 
petitioner 
infonr_ed us that a number of petitions are pending in the High 
Court of Madhya Pradesh in which the question raised in the present 
group of petitions i
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.