LexTARAK NATH GHOSH versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
TARAK NAm GHOSH v. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. February 22, 1968 [K. N. WANCHOO, C.J., S. M. SIKRI, J.M. Sm!LAT, V. BHARGAVA AND C. A. VAJDIAL!NGAM, JJ.) Co11sti111tion of India, Art. 314-All India Servict9 Act, 1951-The Indicn Police ServU:e C&cruitment) Rules 1954; The All India ServU:u '(Discipline and Appeal) Rules 19SS; Civil Services (C/IJSsificatlon, Contr0l and Appeal) Rules, 1930, r. SS-Appellant recruited to the Indian Police in 1931-Enquiry ordered against him and susp.enslon under 19SS Ru/ts -:If valid-Whether he became member of Indian Police Strvice-There- fore iJ gov_erned b,y service conditions accordingly. The appellant was appointed to the Secretary of States ServiQ! known as the Indian .Police in 1937. On June 29, 1965 while he was wrotina as a Deputy Inspector-General of Police in Bihar, an order was mad< by the State Government placing him under suspension pending an enquiIJ. Later, this order was partially amended by_ the Central Government which itself passed an order of. suspension in vie.w of the pending enquiry. Tho appellant challenged these orders by a writ petition It was contended by him that he had never become a member of the Indian Police Service which was constituted in August 194 7, therefore the All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 19SS, did not apply to him and conse- quently the enquiry directed under rr. 4 and S could not be instituted against him under these rules, that in any case in view of r. SS of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930, which applied to him by virtue of Ari. 314 of the Constitution, the Bihar Government had no power to order an enquiry against him as it was not the authority entitled to pass an order of dismissal removal or reduction in rank; only the Central Government could have, have ordered the inquiry. It was 1urther contended that if the enquiry itself had been invalidly instituted, the order of suspension automatically became invalid. The High Court dismissed the petition. On appeal to this Court, HELD : dismissing the appeal, On the passing of the Indian Independence Aet, the appellant ceased to be a member of the service constitut<:d by the Secretary of State but he continued to serve the Government of India and the Province of Bihar, as a result of which certain rights relating to conditions of service and disciplinary matters. "'·hich \\"ere earlier applicable to him. were presened. At the time when the Indian Polioe (Cadre) Rules, 1950, were framed, B c D E F the· appellant was not a member of any regularly constituted service and G his position remained the same until, under the Indian Police Service (Recruitment) Rules, 19S4, he was included in the Indian Police Service and again became a member of a regularly constituted service; he could be competently incl)lded in that service, because on that date he was only holding a cadre post, but \\'as not a member of any other regular service. Consequently, the contention that the Rules of 1955 did not apply to the appellant must he rejected, because. when those Rules came into force, the appellant was already a member of the Indian Police Service. [229 H- H 230 DJ Those persons, who were. appointed to the Indian Police under the Crown before Independence, ceased to be members of any regularly co.n· . ' .. A B c D T. N. GHOSH v. BIHAR (Bhargava, J.) 22~ •tituted Service when the Indian Independence Act came into force in 1947. Coder the agreement that was entered into by the new Indian Government with the British GovernmenJ, provision was made that members of the previous Secretary of State's Service could continue to serve tho Govern· nlent of India on a provincial Government and certain rights were pre- served to them if they continued to do so. There was, however. no pro~ vision that the old Secretary of State's Service would continue, so that with the passing of the Indian Independence Act, Secretary of State's Police ceased to exist. [228 G, HJ Stotc of Madras & Anr. v. K. M. Rajagopalan, [19SS] 2 S.C.R. S4!, R. ·p, Kapur v. Union of India & Anr. [1964J $.C.R. 431, referred to. Under Ari. 314 of the Constitution, the right that continued to enure to the benefit of the appellant was that the enquiry to be held in his con. duct nfost comply with the requirements of r. 55 of the Rules of 1930. An enquiry ordered under the Rules of 19S5 is in no way detrimental to tlie interest of th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.