MUNSHIRAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Art. 226, Constitution of India for the issue of a writ or a direction to the opponent State to cancel an order of the petitioner's retirement from service and to continue him in service till he attains the age of sixty or completes thirty years of service.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present proceedings can be stated quite shortly. The applicant who was born on 1 -8 -1903 entered the public service of the former Gwalior State in 1923. The applicant was serving as an accountant in the Collector's office at Guna, and under the Rules of Service operative in the Gwalior State, ne was entitled to continue in service till the completion of the age of sixty years or till the completion of thirty years' service.

(3.) I think for a correct approach to the matter it is necessary to first what the position is under the Constitution with regard to the members of public services. This has been fully explained in the case of - - 'Mrs. Lilawati Mutatkar v. State of Madhya Bharat',, AIR 1952 MB 105 (A), where it has been pointed out that persons employed in the service of the State hold their employment at the pleasure of the President or the Governor or the Rajpramukh, as the case may be and that they can be dismissed, removed or reduced in rank at the pleasure of these authorities subject to the limitation imposed by Art. 311; that this article does not in any way alter or affect the principle embodied in Art. 310 that a Government servant holds office during the pleasure of the Head of the State; that Art. 311 only imposes certain statutory obligations before dismissal or removal or reduction in rank is effected; that the Madhya Bharat Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1950 only lay down merely administrative rules for the guidance of officers of the Government in the imposition of penalties and in the conduct of the departmental inquiries against Government servants; that the dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of a civil servant in violation of the rules would not by itself entitle him to come to the High Court but would leave him to appeal to the administrative authorities and that it is only a breach of Art. 311 that furnishes a cause of action to a civil servant adversely affected to come to the High Court or to approach a civil Court for redress.