R P KAPUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal on a certificate granted by the Punjab High Court. The appellant joined the Indian Civil Service in 1939 and was governed in matters relating to discipline by the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, (hereinafter referred to as the Appeal Rules) made by the Secretary of State for India in Council. He continued in service till the transfer of power under the Indian Independence Act. 1947. Under S. 10 of that Act he continued to serve under the Government of India and was entitled to receive from the Government of Indian or of the Province which he might from time to time be serving the same conditions of service as respects remuneration, leave and pension, and the same rights as respects disciplinary matters or, as the case may be, as respects the tenure of his office, or rights as similar thereto as changed circumstances may permit as he was entitled to immediately before the transfer of power, which took place on August 15, 1947. The same guarantee was extended to the appellant and all member of what were the Secretary of State's Services before. August 15, 1947 by Art. 314 of the Constitution. As the appellant's case is based on that Article we may set it out:

(2.) It appears that the appellant was in the Indian Civil Service cadre in the State of Madras at the time of transfer of power, though later he was transferred to the Punjab. After the transfer of power the Indian Civil Service as a Secretary of State's Service came to an end and thereafter a new Service was constituted known as the Indian Administrative Service. Formal legal shape was given to the new Service after the enactment of the All Indian Services Act, No. LXI of 1951, and the Indian Administrative Service (Recruitment) Rules 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Recruitment Rules) were framed under Act LXI of 1951. By R. 3 of these Rules, the Indian Administrative Service was to consist of-

(3.) On July 18, 1959 ,the appellant was suspended with immediate effect by the Governor of the Punjab on the ground that a criminal case was pending against him. The order also provided that for the period of suspension the appellant shall be paid subsistence allowance which shall be equal to leave salary which he would have drawn under the leave rules applicable to him if he had been on leave on half average pay with a further provision that in case the suspension lasted for more than twelve months, a further order fixing the rate of subsistence allowance shall be passed. This order appears to have been passed under R. 7 (3) of the Discipline Rules and in consequence there of the appellant remained under suspension.