9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (3) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... points have been argued by Mr. Garg, on behalf of the petitioner. We are grateful to Mr. Garg, who has argued as amicus curiae, for the assistance he has given. The two points may be formulated as follows: (1) That the Mysore General Services (Revenue Subordinate Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1959, were not made with the previous approval of the Central Government under s. 115(7) of the State Re-organisation Act, and, therefore, do not govern the petitioner insofar as the conditions of service have been varied to his disadvantage; (2) That the Madras-Government had, prior to, November 1, 1956, by various orders, reduced the petitioner in rank in violation of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution and Art. 16. In order to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of India addressed a memorandum (No. S.O. SRDI-1. APM-57) to all State Governments. Broadly speaking, the Central Government said that some conditions of service should be protected, e.g., substantive pay of permanent employees, certain type of special pay, lave rules unless the Government servant opts for new leave rules, etc. But in respect of departmental promotion it said that the question whether any protection should be given in respect of rules and conditions applicable to Government servants affected by reorganisation immediately before the date of reorganisation in the matter of travelling allowance, discipline, control, classification, appeal, conduct, pro- bation and departmental promotion was also considered. The Government o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this power, and the limitation is that the State cannot vary the conditions of service applicable immediately before November 1, 1956, to the disadvantage of persons mentioned in sub-ss (1) and (2) of s. 115. It is not disputed that the petitioner is one of those persons. Mr. Garg has submitted that the very fact that the Mysore General Services (Revenue Subordinate Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1959, as framed, were not sent to the Central Government for approval before being promulgated shows that previous approval has not been obtained. The memorandum, he says, is not approval but an abdication of the powers of the Central Government. In this connection he relies on the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of In re Bosworth and C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t by giving its previous approval. In this context, we think that it could not have been the intention of Parliament that Service Rules made by States would be scrutinised in the minutest detail by the Central Government. Conditions vary from State to State and the details must be filled by each State according to its re- quirements. The broad purpose underlying the proviso to s. 115(7) of the Act was to ensure that the conditions of ser- vice should not be changed except with the prior approval of the Central Government. In other words, before embarking on varying the conditions of service, the State Governments should obtain the concurrence of the Central Government. In the memorandum mentioned above, the Central Government, after examini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
