LexU.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AT ALLAHABAD versus SURESH CHANDRA TEWARI & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
- U.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AT ALLAHABAD v. SURESH CHANDRA TEW ARI & ANR. AUGUST 7, 1987 [E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND K.N. SINGH, JJ.] Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930-- R. 69-Read with Regulation 20 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulation, 1937, and Regulation A B 28 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission Staff Regulations, 1942-0rders passed by Commission in disciplinary proceedings C against gazetted ministerial officers other than Under Secretary and Assistant Secretary are subject to appeal to the State Government. Io an appeal preferred by respondent No. 1 against orders revert· iog him from the post of Section Officer to a lower post and dismissing him from service, the State Government found that he had not been D afforded a reasonable opportunity to defend himself at the inquiry, and set aside the order of dismissal directing the State Public Service Com- mission to reinstate him in the lower post and hold a fresh inquiry. The Commission having declined to comply with the order of the State Government, respondent No. 1 filed a writ petition, and the High Court directed the Commission to comply with the said order. E Io this petition for special leave to appeal, the Commission con- tended (1) that since it was a Constitutional Authority being not subor· dinate to the State Government, the latter could not have heard the appeal filed against its order passed in a disciplinary proceeding; and (2) that in any event, the appeal should have been disposed of by the F Governor himself and not by the Governor in accordance with the advice of the State Government. Dismissing the petition, -_, HELD: The Commission may be a constitutional authority not G subordinate to any other authority. But the orders passed by the Com- mission in disciplinary proceedings held against the members of its staff are subject to the appeal to the State Government under r. 69 of the Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930, read with Regulation 20 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1937 as amended in 1978. There is H 833 834 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1987] 3 S.C.R. A no ground for thinking that the independence of the Commission would be affected by the State Government exercising the appellate power in disciplinary matters as provided by Regulation 20. [837H; 838A-B] B Hargovind Pant v. Dr. Raghukul Tilak & Ors., (1979] 3 S.C.R. 972, referred to. Role 69 of the Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1930 is to the effect that the State Government may, of its own motion or otherwise, call for the record of any case decided by an authority subordinate to it in the exercise of any power conferred on such authority by these rules, and inter alia, confirm, modify or reverse C the order passed by such authority, or direct tjtat a further enquiry be held in the case. Rule 69-A sets out the procedure to be followed in filing a petition under rule 69. RuJes 69 and 69-A are substantially applicable to the members of the staff of the Commission by virtue of Regulation 28 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Staff Regulations, 1942, even though the Commission may not be an authority subordinate to the D State Government because while applying r. 69 to the staff of the Com- mission the rule should be read with the necessary modification by substituting in the place of the words 'an authority subordinate to it' the words 'the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission'. In any event by virtue of the amendment made to Regulation 20 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1937 in E 1978 appeals against the orders of the Commission passed in respect of the gazetted ministerial officers other than the Under Secretary and the Assistant Secretary .lie to the Goveruor. Respondent No. l being a gazetted officer holding the post of a Section Officer was entitled to prefer an appeal under Regulation 20 to the Governor. [837C-G] F 2. It is no doubt true that Regulation 20 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission (Conditions of Service) Regulations, 1937 provides that appeals against the orders of the Commission shall be made to the Goveruor. But while exercising his powers under that Regulation the Governor has to act on the advice given by the State Government by virtue of A
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.