# ANOTHER v. N.BAKSHI

- **Citation:** [1962] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 505
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1962
- **Bench:** B. P. Sinha, J. L. Kapur, M. HmAYATULLAII, J.C. Shah, J. R. Mudholkar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/another-v-n-bakshi-2438
- **Pages:** 13

## Headnote

Indian Civil
Service-Conditt'ona
of Bl.rvfce-F'assage
benefits-Statutory right-Constitutional guarantee-Cancellation of passage benefit• under ruk making pou·er-Validity-
' 1 Remuntration '', meaning of-Superior Oiv,il ServiceB (Revision of pay and pension) Rule., 1924-Government of India
Act, 1935 (25 & 36 Geo. 5, Oh.42), s. 247 (1) -Indian Independence Aet, 1947 (10 &. II Geo. 6, Oh. 30), ss. 10 (2), 19(4)-
All India Services Act, 1!151 (61of1951}, ss. 3,4-Alt India
Services (Ot•.r.eas pay, paa•age and leave sa/,ary) Ruka, 1957,
r.3-0onstitution of India, Art. 314.
Under the Superior Civil Services (Revision of Pay and
Pension) Rules, 1924, framed by the Secretary of State for
India-in-Council under the provisions of the Government of
India Act, 1919, members of the Indian Civil Service and their
wivCJ and children were entitled to passage benefits which
IHI
J!/r. A'1otifJur_~
Zamindary c •. ( P)
Ltd.
v.
Thi State of Bihar
Kapur J.
11161
N •vembet 11.
J9G1
T~ .iccountunl
Grncrol, Bilrar
v.
N. BakJ;i
50li
SUPREME C'OURT REPORTS [19G2] SUPP.
were 1nadc part of the salary or rrrnuneration.
By an a1ncndment made in the Rules in 1926 the passage benefits, for pur·
poses of administrative convenience ceased to be a part of the
salary and Lecame allowances or privileges. They were aepa·
ra1ely credited to the account of members of the Indian Civil
Sci vice and debited as and when they were availed of out of
the general revenues of the State. The conditions of sc1·vice
to which members of the Indian Civil Service were entitled
under the Government of India Act, 1919, were guaranteed
10 them by s.247(1) of the Goverrunent of India Act, 1935,
and this guarantee was confirmed by 1. 10(2) of the Indian
Independence Act, 1947. By Art. 314 of the Constitution of
India penons who were appointed by the Secretary of State lo
a civil service of the Crown in India anrl continued on and
<after the: co1nmcnccn1cnt of the C'~nstitutiJn to serve under the
Go,·ei urnent of India or of a Stale were to receive from the
GO\crnmenl of India and the Government of the State which
they ,,·rrc from time to time serving, the saine <..:onditions of
sc1,·ice as respects ren1uneration, leave and pension ""·hich they
were enti!led to immediately before such commencement. On
F<Lruarr 5, 1957, the Government of India framed, in exercise of the powers conferred by the All India Services Act,
1951, the All India Services (Overseas Pay, Passage and Leave
Salary) Rules, 1957, by r. 3 of which the passage benefits provide<l by the Rules of 1924, as amended in 1926, ceased, with
re1rospec1ive effect from July 12, I 95G, to apply lo the members
of the Iudian Civil Service.
1'he respondent \vho was ac.hnittcd to the Indian Civil Service in 1924 and continucd to set vc
in tlte State of l!ihar after independence challenged the 'alid1ty of the rule.
/Jeld, that r. 3 of the All India Services Overseas l'ay,
l'as~agc and Leave Salary Rules, 1957, \\as ultra virc.!.
The right to passage benefits was a part of the remuneration earned by the mcn1bcrs of the ln<lian Civil Service, and
as the conditions of service as to rcn1uneration had been guaranteed by Art. 314 of the Constitution of India, the Central
Government in exercise of its ntlc making power could not
dcstory or cancel a constitutional guarantee.
The word 11rc1nuncration" in Art. 314 of the Con~titu ..
tiun explained.
R. v. Po1tma.sltr Gtn<ral, (1876) I Q.l!.D. 658, relied on.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURI8DICTIO!!I
Civil Appeal
No. 704 of 1957.
1
(1) S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT ItEPOR'IB 501
Appeal from the judgment and order dated
March l l, 1957, of the Patna High Court, in Misc.
Judi~ial Case No. 40 of 1957.
M. C. 8etali-ad, Attorney-General for India, H.
Ganapathy Iyer R.H. Dhebar and '1'. Jlf. Sen, for the
appellants.
S. P. Venna, for the respondent.
1961. November 21.
The Judgment of the
Court was delivered by
SHAH, J.-This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature :it Patna
from an order commanding the

## Text

r
(1) S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS
505
(2)( i) of Bihar Annul Finance Act intended to effect
a temporary amendment in the previous definition
of the word "dealer" in cl( c) of s. 2 of the Act.
The contention is therefore repelled.
It was also submitted that the assent of the
President was not given to the Bihar Annual Finance Aot 1950. In our opinion that submission
iJ equally without force because tax on sale of
goo<ls is a matter entirely within entry 54 of the
State List and the amendment made in the dtfinition of the word "dealer" in the Act did not require
the assent of tho President.
In our opinion the appeals and the petitions
under Art. 32 are without merit and are therefore
dismissed with costs. One hearing fee.
Appecds and writ petitions dismissed.
THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, BIHAR AND
ANOTHER
v.
N.BAKSHI
(B. P. SINHA, C. J., J. L. KAPUR, M. HmAYATULLAII,
J.C. SHAH and J. R. MUDHOLKAR, JJ.)
Indian Civil
Service-Conditt'ona
of Bl.rvfce-F'assage
benefits-Statutory right-Constitutional guarantee-Cancellation of passage benefit• under ruk making pou·er-Validity-
' 1 Remuntration '', meaning of-Superior Oiv,il ServiceB (Revision of pay and pension) Rule., 1924-Government of India
Act, 1935 (25 & 36 Geo. 5, Oh.42), s. 247 (1) -Indian Independence Aet, 1947 (10 &. II Geo. 6, Oh. 30), ss. 10 (2), 19(4)-
All India Services Act, 1!151 (61of1951}, ss. 3,4-Alt India
Services (Ot•.r.eas pay, paa•age and leave sa/,ary) Ruka, 1957,
r.3-0onstitution of India, Art. 314.
Under the Superior Civil Services (Revision of Pay and
Pension) Rules, 1924, framed by the Secretary of State for
India-in-Council under the provisions of the Government of
India Act, 1919, members of the Indian Civil Service and their
wivCJ and children were entitled to passage benefits which
IHI
J!/r. A'1otifJur_~
Zamindary c •. ( P)
Ltd.
v.
Thi State of Bihar
Kapur J.
11161
N •vembet 11.
J9G1
T~ .iccountunl
Grncrol, Bilrar
v.
N. BakJ;i
50li
SUPREME C'OURT REPORTS [19G2] SUPP.
were 1nadc part of the salary or rrrnuneration.
By an a1ncndment made in the Rules in 1926 the passage benefits, for pur·
poses of administrative convenience ceased to be a part of the
salary and Lecame allowances or privileges. They were aepa·
ra1ely credited to the account of members of the Indian Civil
Sci vice and debited as and when they were availed of out of
the general revenues of the State. The conditions of sc1·vice
to which members of the Indian Civil Service were entitled
under the Government of India Act, 1919, were guaranteed
10 them by s.247(1) of the Goverrunent of India Act, 1935,
and this guarantee was confirmed by 1. 10(2) of the Indian
Independence Act, 1947. By Art. 314 of the Constitution of
India penons who were appointed by the Secretary of State lo
a civil service of the Crown in India anrl continued on and
<after the: co1nmcnccn1cnt of the C'~nstitutiJn to serve under the
Go,·ei urnent of India or of a Stale were to receive from the
GO\crnmenl of India and the Government of the State which
they ,,·rrc from time to time serving, the saine <..:onditions of
sc1,·ice as respects ren1uneration, leave and pension ""·hich they
were enti!led to immediately before such commencement. On
F<Lruarr 5, 1957, the Government of India framed, in exercise of the powers conferred by the All India Services Act,
1951, the All India Services (Overseas Pay, Passage and Leave
Salary) Rules, 1957, by r. 3 of which the passage benefits provide<l by the Rules of 1924, as amended in 1926, ceased, with
re1rospec1ive effect from July 12, I 95G, to apply lo the members
of the Iudian Civil Service.
1'he respondent \vho was ac.hnittcd to the Indian Civil Service in 1924 and continucd to set vc
in tlte State of l!ihar after independence challenged the 'alid1ty of the rule.
/Jeld, that r. 3 of the All India Services Overseas l'ay,
l'as~agc and Leave Salary Rules, 1957, \\as ultra virc.!.
The right to passage benefits was a part of the remuneration earned by the mcn1bcrs of the ln<lian Civil Service, and
as the conditions of service as to rcn1uneration had been guaranteed by Art. 314 of the Constitution of India, the Central
Government in exercise of its ntlc making power could not
dcstory or cancel a constitutional guarantee.
The word 11rc1nuncration" in Art. 314 of the Con~titu ..
tiun explained.
R. v. Po1tma.sltr Gtn<ral, (1876) I Q.l!.D. 658, relied on.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURI8DICTIO!!I
Civil Appeal
No. 704 of 1957.
1
(1) S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT ItEPOR'IB 501
Appeal from the judgment and order dated
March l l, 1957, of the Patna High Court, in Misc.
Judi~ial Case No. 40 of 1957.
M. C. 8etali-ad, Attorney-General for India, H.
Ganapathy Iyer R.H. Dhebar and '1'. Jlf. Sen, for the
appellants.
S. P. Venna, for the respondent.
1961. November 21.
The Judgment of the
Court was delivered by
SHAH, J.-This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature :it Patna
from an order commanding the Accountant General
of Bihar, Ranchi, to pay certain passage allowance
due under the Superior Civil Services (Revision of
Pay and Pension) Rules, 1924, to the wife and tho
children of the respondent.
After passing the competitive examination
held in London in August, 1924 the respondent N.
Bakshi was admitted in November,
l\~24 to the
Indian Civil Service a.nd was, after his arrival in
India, posted in the Province of Bihar.
He
continued to serve in the State of Bihar after independence.
On February 3, 1956, the respondent enquired
of the Accountant General of Bihar about the number of passages to which he and the members of
his family were entitled under the Superior Civil
Services (Revision of Pay and Pension) Rules,
1924-hereinafter called the Statutory Rules. The
The Accountant General, by letter dated March 6,
1956, stated that £284-6 s. stood in the respondent's
credit £ 341-3-5d. stood in the account of his wife
and £ 138 stood credited in the · separate accounts
of ea.ch of hia four children. The respondent then
arranged to travel to the United Kingdom and on
June 20, 1956, obtained "passage certificates" from
the Accountnnt General, Bihar. On July 12,1956, the
re1pondent waa informed that the Govt. of India. were
)961
The Accounta11t
General, Bi11a1
v.
N. Bakshi
Sita/. J.
IHI
Tht.~t
G,,.,,al, Biluu
v.
H. Bokslai
508 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS (1982] SUPP.
of the opinion that the paese.ge benefits admissible to
officers of Indian domicile under the sai<l Statutory
Rules, were inconsistent with the existing circumstances and it was decided, with effect from the date
of issue of the order that the benefits shall cease
and the passa&e accounts of Indian Officer11 of the
former Secretary of State Servioos shall be closed
and "passage credit" left over will lapse to the
Government.
On February 5, 1957, the Government of
India framed, in exercise of the powers conferred
by sub-s. ( 1) of s. 3 of the All India Services Act,
61of1951, the All India Servioee (Overseas Pay,
Passage and Leave Salary) Rules, 1957. By cl. 3
of the Rules passage benefits providP<l by the
statutory Hules ceased with retrospeoti»e effect
from July 12, 1956, to apply to the members of the
Indian Civil Service.
The appellant protested
against the cancellation of the passage benefits for
himself and the members of his family. The
Government of India waived the original order of
July 12, 1956, in favour of th3 respondent and
ordered that he be granted pa.aea.ge benefit for himself but declined to relax the order in favour of
the wife and children of the respondent. The
respondent accompanied by his wife and children
proceeded to the United Kingdom a.s originally
arranged and on his return filed a. petition under
Art. 226 of the Constitution for a. writ in the nature
of mandamw against the Accountant Genera.I,
Biha.r, oo=anding him to pay the prescribed
passage money in respect of the respondent's wife
and children out of the amounts which stood to
their credit in the Genera.I Passage Fund Aooount
and to i.eaue appropriate direction, order or writ in
that behalf. '.rhis petition wa.e granted by the
High Court and a writ of flllJndamus a.e prayed wa.e
i.eaued. The Accountant General and the Union
of India have appealed to this Court againat
the order with certificate of fl.tne88 granted by the
High Court.
,
(l) S.C.R.
SUPREME OOURT REPORTS
509
To appreciate the grounds on which the impu.
gned order was made it is necessary to ref~r to the
Statutory Rules for pa~sage benefit framed in 1924
by the Secretary of State in Council and the amendments thereof in the light of constitutional development sinee that date.
The Statutory Rules were framed by the
Secretary of State
for India-in-Council under
s. 96B(2) and (3) of the Government of India Act,
1919, on December 9, 1924. Rule 12 of the Statutory Rules provides :
"12. In ad"lition to the pay prescribed
by these Rules passage pay shall be irranted
at the rates and subject to the conditions set
out in Schedule IV, to the members of the
services and holders of appointment' enume·
rated in Appendix A to th.1tt Schedule."
Schedule IV appended to the Regulations set out
an elaborate scheme for maintaining accounts of
the passage pay and for disbursement thereof.
Regulations 3, 5, 6( 1), 8, 9 and 14, which itre the
material regulations stood as follows :-
"3. 'L'here shall be payable to every
officer with effect from the Ist day of April,
1924 passage pay at the rate of Rs. 50 per
mensem or such different rate as the GovemorGeneral in Council may by order declare to
be nece888.ry or sufficient for the purpose of
the provision of the benefits conferred by these
regiilations."
"5. A sum equal to the amount received
by an officer as pa11aage pay shall be deducted
monthly from the officer's pay or leave salary,
as the case may be, and shaIJ be credited to
a General .Passage Fund to be administered
by the Governor-General.in.Council."
"6 (I) The maximum benefits to which
ofticer sllall be entitled shall be passages of a
IHI
Tiu ifccou'ltarJt
G1ntral, Bihar
v.
N. B«kshi
BW.J.
T1w Accou11t11nt
Oennol. Bihar
Y,
N. Bakihi
Shah J.
510
SUPREME OOURT REPORTS (1962] SUPP.
total value equal to the oost of the number
of passage.~ between Bombay and London by
P. & 0., lat Class B, Rhown below :-
•
•
•
"8. A separate account shall be opened
in 11terling in the case of each officer, and, if
such officer is married, for his wife, and, if he
has children, for ea.ch chili!. Th<'se accounts
11ha.IJ he credited reRpcctively with the cost of
the piis~ageR to which the offioor, his wife and
chililrrn &r<'
i>nt.itlerl
unrfor R.f'gnla.tion r.
*
*
*"
"14. No person whosoever shall h&Vfl
any claim on th" Genera.I
Passage Fund
beyond the provi11ion
of the benefits, if
any, conferrr:'d on him by these rcgulation11
and anv balance remaining at the crC'dit of
any person after such pe!"lon bas ceaB<'d to be
eligible for any such benefits shall lapse to
the Fund."
Passage benefit providerl under Rule 12 was clearly
part of the salary to be paid out of a fund called
the General Pa.RSagc Fund which was formed out of
the paslll\ge pay.
Several amendments
wore made to these
Rules from time to time, but we a.re concerned with
the amendments made by Notifications No. F-178/
11/1/24 dated October Ii, 1921i, and No. F-li-15/26
dated June 16, l!l'.:!6.
Rule 12, as a.mended, read11
nR follows:-
"12. In addition to the pay prescribed
by these Rules, passages shall be· granted,
subject to the conditions set out in Schedule
IV, to the members of the service11 and holders
of appointments enumerated in Appendix A
to that Schedule.''
The Regulations under Sch. IV were, after the
amedment, ca.lied Revision of Pay, Passage and
-·
(1) S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
511
Pension Regulations. Original regulations 3, 4 and 5
were omitted and regulations 6, 8, 11 and H were
amended. The effect of these amendments was that
instead of allowing as part of salary, a paRsage
pay of Rs. 50/- and carrying over that amount to
the credit of the officer concerne9 in the General
Passage Fund, by cl. 6 of the Regulations it was
directed that a separate "passage account" be opened for each officer and if he be married for hiR wife
and children, if any. Subject to Regulation 8, the
accounts were to be credited respectively with the
number of passages to which the officer, his wife
and children were entitled under the new regulations.
Within the limits of these credits,
the officer was entitled to draw for himself,
his wife and his children respectively the cost
of a journey between a port in India and a
port outside Asia. Whereas by the Rules as
originally framed in 1924 an additional salary
of Rs. 50/- per mensem was awurded to each offiPer
as passage pay which was to be credited to the
General Passage Fund out of which passage benefits to Officers were provided, according to the
scheme of the Rules as amended in 1926, a separate
passage account was to be maintained for. each
officer for the maximum benefits prescribed by Rule
3 and the disbursement in respect thereof were to
be made of the General Revenue of the State. By
the amendment made in the Rules in 1926, the
passage benefit. ceased to be a part of the salary
and became an allowance or privilege.
The respondent obtained benefit of these
passages in 1930, 1950-51 anrl 1952-53 for himself
and the members of his family.
In 1957 he was
not granted the passage lienefi.t for his wife and
his children, and he has filed this petition under
Art. 226 for an order that the Union of India and
the Accountant General do carry out their Statutory
obligations.
1961
Th~ .4.ccoll'11'1">it
Oeri1Tol, BihtJr
v.
N. Bokshi
S\ah J.
IHI
7li Acco1111,..,
Om11ai Biliar
•.
N. Bakslri
SMA J.
512 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1962) SUPP.
The conditions or eervioe to which membe!'ll
of the Indian Civil Service were entiled under the
Government of India Aot, 1919, were guaranteed
to them by s.247(1) of the Government of India
Act, 1935. That section provided:
"247 (I). 1The conditions of service of
all persons appointed to a civil 11ervice or
civil post by the Secretary of State shall :-
(a) as respects pay, leave and pension
and general rights in regard to medical attendance, be such as may be prescribed by
rules to be made by the Secretary or State;
(b) as respeot.B other matters with respect to which exprell8 provision is not made
by this chapter, be such as may be prescribed
by rules to be made by the Secretary of State
in 10 far as he thinks fit to make such rules, ·
and, in so far and so long as provision is not
made
by
such
rules, by ruleB
to
be
made, as respeote pel'Bons serving in connection with the affail'B of the Federation,
by the Governor-General or some pel'Bon or
persons suthorised by the Governor-General
to make rulea.Jor the purpose and, as respects
persons eening in oonnection with the affairs
of a Province, by the Governor of the Province
or some person or persons authorised by the
Governor to make rules for the purpose:
Provided that no rule made under this
au b-section shall have effect so as to give to
any person appointed to a civil service or
civil post by the Secretary of State Iese favour·
able terms ae respeot.e remuneration or pension
than were given to him by the rules in force
on the date on which he waa first appointed
to his service or was appointed to hiE rest."
The proviso makes it abundantly olear that the
power to make rules cannot be exercised by the
,.
(I) S.C.R.
SUPREME OOURT R:Ei'OR±S
5i:J
Secretary of State so as to give to any officer of
the class specified terms less favourable as respects
remuneration or pension than were given to him by
the rules in force on the date on which he was
first appointed to his service or to his post. This
guarantee was confirmed by s. IO, sub·s. (2) of the
Indian Independence Act, 1947, wherein it was
provided, in so far as it is material, that "Every
person who-
( a) havining been appointed by the
Secretary of State or Secretary of State in
Council, to a civil service of the Crown in
India continues on and after the appointed
day to 8erve under the Government of either
of the new Dominions or of any province or
part thereof; or
(b)
*
*
*
*
shall be entitled to receive from the Govern-·
ments of the Dominions and Provinces or
parts which he is from time to time serving
or, as the case may be
*
*
•
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 -that
person was
entitled to immediately before the appointed
day."
The expression "remuneration" was defined in
s. 19(4) of that Act as incl usive of leaye :!Jay,
allowances and the cost of any privileges or
facilities
provided iu kind.
By Art. 314 of
the Constitution, persons who were appointed
by the Secretary of State
or Secret,ary of
State in Council to a civil service of the Crown in
India and continued on and after the comme:O:cement of the Constitution to serve under the Government of India or of a State were to receive from
~
the Government of India and the Goverument of
1
the State which they were from ti.mo to time
• '
1911
Tiu A.cc.un.tt1nt
Gen6T•l, Bihttr
Y,
N.Bahhi
S"4h J.
1961
Tiu Accountant
OeNro/1 BiMr
v.
N, BaJ;shi
Shah J,
514 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1962) SUPP.
serving, the same conditions of service as respects
remuneration leave and pension which they wc·rc
entitled to immediately before such oommmenoement. The Parliament of India enacted the All
India. Services Act, 61 of 1951, to regulate the
recruitment, and the conditions of service of per·
sons appointed, to tho all India Services common
to the Union and tho States, and bv s. 3 of that
Act the Central ·Government was authorised to make
rules for the reguhtion of recruitmPnt, and the
conditions of service of persons appointed, to the
All India Service.
By s. 4 it was
provided
that all rules in force immediately before the commenccment of the Act and applicable to an AllIndia Service were to continue to b9 in force and
were t-0 be deemed to be rules made under the Act.
On September 8, 1954, the Central Government
·framed rules called the Indian Administrative Services Recruiting Rules and hy Rule 2(d) the mem,
hors of the Indian Civil Service who continued to
serve on and after the commencement of the Constitution were to be regarded for the purpose of the
rules as members of the Indian Administrative
Seryice. On February 15, J9fi7, the All India Services (Overseas Pay, P888age and Leave Salary)
Rules, 1957, were promulgated in exercise of the
powers conferred by sub-s ( 1) of s.3 of the All India
Services Act, 1951, and thereby passage benefits in
favour of the memtiers of the Indian Administrative Service, who were originally mt1mbers of the
Indian Civ,J Service were cancelled.
The only question which falls to be determined in this a ppcal is whether cl. 3 of the All
India Services (Overseas Pay, Passage and Lea1•c
Salary) Rules, 1957, was competently enacted, hav·
ing regard to tho guarantee contained in Art.
314 of the Constitution as to tb.e conditions of
service as respects remunoration, leave and Pf'n·
sion of the persons appointed by tht Secretary of
Seate or Secretary of State for India in Council to
a
civil
sorvice
of
the
Crown
in
India.
•'
•
I
•
I
• r
(1) S.C.R.
SUPREME OOURT REPORTS
515
Since the All In:lia Services Act was enacted there
is manifestly no existing service known as the
Iadian Civil Service. The members of the Indian
Civil Service who were appointed by the Secretary
of State for India became members of the Indian
Administrative Service, but their rights in the
matter of conditions of service as respects remu·
m:ration, leave and pension stood guaranteed by
Art. 314.
In dealing with the status of the members of
the former Indian Civil Service since the Indian Inde·
pendenoe Act, 1947, this Court in 8tate of Madras
v. K. M. Rajagop£1lan (1) held :
thiit (1) the conferral of independence on
India brought about an automatic and legal
termination of service on the date of Inde·
pendence;
(2) all persons previously holding civil
posts in India are deemed to have been
appointed and hence to continue in service,
except those governed by general or special
orders arrangements affecting their respecti vo
cases;
(3) the guarantee about prior conditions
of service and the previous statutory safe
guards relating to disciplinary action continues to apply to those who are thus deemed
to continue in st>rvice but not to others;
and
(4) those previously holding civil posts
in India had the right, and were in fact
given the option, of declining to "continue
in service" under the new regime and in the
event of their exercising that option they
ceased to serve on and from the date of the
passing of the constitution .
(!) [1955] 2 S. C.R. 54!.
1961
Tiu Accouirt.mt
'.Jenera/, Bihar
v.
N. Bakshi
Shah J.
Tht Accounlant
Get.tr al, BJtar
v.
N. Bt1kJlii
Slu;h J.
510
~UPRRME O)URT REPORTs (1962] SUPP.
l.:11dcr the Statulnry RuleH framed in 1!1:!4
passage benefits granted to persons employed in
the Indian Civil Service, their wives am! children
wne expressly made part of the sl\lary or rcmulleration. Cnder the amendment of 19:W, these pas·
sage benefits atqnired the eharacter of allowance,
privilege or facility of office.
By the Act ,,f 1935
(s. 2-li) priviJ.,gcs, iriter al·i<J as to remuneration
under the Governrmmt of Indi.'I Act of IHl!J wero
expressly guarnt<'cd in favour of the members of
the Indiau Ci,·il s,,rvire. By the Indian Ind .. pendence Act 1947, a similar guurantllc in respcet. of
conditions of service as respects remuneration was
also conferred and by s. l!l ( 4) of that Act n·muncration was dt'fincd as indusive of pay, allowam·cs
or privileges or facilitil's paynblc in kind. By .<\rt.
ill4 of the Constitutio11, the conditions of scr\"ice,
prior to llw C1•nstitution as ri:spt•cts rr.m1m1,,·ation,
leave and p(•nHion of . the members of the .Indian
Civil Service were protected.
Thero is
11 o dr·fiuit.ion of 'remuneration' in
the C1Jnstitution, but that is not a gromul f1Jr hold·
iug that the expression ii; used in any limited ~ensP
as merely l!lllary.
The PXprcssion 'remuneration',
in it" ordinary conn<>tation means "reward, recompense, pay, wages or salary for service rendcrd"
In R. v. Po8trrwster General(') Blackhurn, ,J., obser ·
ved, "I think th" word 'rcmnnreatfon' ...... means a
quid pm quo. If a ma.n gives his services; what.over
consideration he gets for giving his services scL·ms
to lie a rcmuncrat.iun for them.
ConH1.•quc11tly, I
think if a person wai; iu receipt. of a paym .. nt.,
or in receipt of a
percentage, or any kin1\
of paym<•nt which would not be actual money
payment, the amount. he would receive annually
in rcsppct of thi• would he remuneration."
Th11
expression 'r<·mune1 .. •tio11° appears to have been
used in the Constitution
in
this wide connotation. As already observed, the right to passage
(I) (187611 Q. B. D. 6SB.
I
(I) S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS
517
was originally marle a part of the salary, but under
the Rules framed in 1926, the provision for setting
apart a fixer! sum of money as salary out of the
General PaRsagc Funrl was alt<>rcd anrl passages
wc·re crNlited to the account of members of Civil
Services and debited as and when they were availed
of out of the general Revenue of the State. This alteration was made merely for administrative convenience and did not alter the character of the benefit.
Under the Rules of 1924, the provision for passage
was part of the remuneration and it continued to
he such even after tlw amendment of the Rules
in 1926.
The right to passage
benefits was statutory, and was under the Indian Independence Act
in the nature of an allowance, or in any event
privilege or facility
paid
in
kind. It was
expressly
made
part
of the
remuneration
earned bv the members
of the Indian Civil
Service. ·The conditionK of service as to remunemtion having been guaranteed, the right to this
benefit remained guaranteed to those members of
the Indian Civil Serviee who were entitled to it
before the Constitution. This guarantee which was
continut•d in force even after the commencement
of the Constitutiou was for th" first timv by Rules
made in June 19.)7 by rotr'ospective amendment of
the St.atutory Rules from July 12, 1956 sought to be
cancelled.
But the Central Government in exercise
of Rule
making p0wcr
was incompetent to
destroy or cancel ii C<>nst.itutiowil guarantee.
The High Court was, thcr 3fore, in our judg·
ment, right in holding that rule 3 of the All India
Services (Overseas Pay, Passage and Leavl! Salary)
Rnles, l95i, was ultm vi'.res.
In that view of the case thi:< appeal fails al'
is dismissed with costs.
Appeal dismissed.
1961
The Accountant
General, Bihar
Y,
N. Bakshi'