# N. LAKSHMANA RA•) & ORS. ETC v. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. ETC

- **Citation:** [1975] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 328
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1975-04-29
- **Bench:** A. N. Ray, K. K. Mathew, V. R. Krishna Iyer, A. C. Gupta
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/n-lakshmana-ra-ors-etc-v-state-of-karnataka-ors-etc-6522
- **Pages:** 8

## Headnote

Kurnataka State <7h·il Service (Age of Con1pulsory Retiren1e111)
Rules,
1974 and Constitution of India, 1950. Article 309 and 311-Reduction of rhe
aRe of conipulsory retirernent froni 58 to 55 years-Prescribing age of supe.r~
C
annuation, if an1ounts 10 re1noval or termination.
D
E
F
Mysore CO!npulsory Prbnary EducaHon Act, 1969, Section 14(b)-Teachcrs
of pritnary schools beconiing eniployees of State Gi0J-·en11nent-Conditions of
seri•ice to continue· "r,ntil ·other pro1•ision is 1nade"-Section 14(b), if tempo·
rary .and transitional--Conditions, if can be altered by the Governor.
The new State of Mysore came into existence on 1 November, 1956, con·
sequent upon the reorganisation of States brought about by the States Rcorga·
nisation Act, 1956. The reorganised new State consisted of the fonner State
of Mysore, part of the former State of Bombay, part of the fonncr State of
llyderabad, part of the former State of Madras and the ccntrn11y- administered
tcrritorj.i of Coorg. There are three categories of teachers \vho are parties
to these appeals. One group consists of primary and secondary school teachers
in Government schools of the former State of Mysore. The second group
consists of teachers in the schools belonging to various local authorities situated
in the area of the former State of Mysoce.
These teachers were absorbed
in Government service of the new State of Mysore when the said schools were
taken over by the Ciovemment. The third group- cortsists of teachers in the
schools of the School Boards in the Bombay area and the Madra<J area of
the: new State. They \\·ere absorbed in Government service under the J\-fysore
Compulsory PrimJ.ry Education Act, 1969.
On 24 February, 1974, the Karnataka State Civil Service (Age of Con1pulsory Retirement) Rules, 1974 came into existence in exercise of powers
·under Article 309 of the Constitution. These rules provided that notwithstand·
ing anything to the contrary contained in any law, ruie, notification, order or
agreement C\'ery Government servant referred to in sub-rule ( 4) whose :.ige
of compulsory retirement is 58 years shall retire on <:.ttaining the age of
55 years. It was also provided by those Rules that those who continued in
service after attaining the age of 55 years on the date of the promulgation
of the l{ules would retire on the date on which they attained the age of 58 years
G
or l April, 1974 v;·hichever is earlier. It is also stated that those who ,.,.-jll
attain the age of 55 years after the commencement of these Rules, but on or
before 1 April, 1974 would retire on 1 April, 1974. Those who \Vi11 attain 55
years after 1 April, 1974 shall retire on attaining the age of 55 years. The Govern·
ment servant was defined in 1974 Age of Compulsory Retirement Rules to
mean six classes of Government servants. The three categories of teachers who
are parties to these appeals are all covered by the nlles.
ll
It was contended on behalf of the Ex·Mysore Primary and Secondary
·
School teachers that they had their age of retirement at 58 years and they
were protected under the proviso to sub·section (7) of section 115 of the
States Reorganisation Act. It was contended on behalf of the teachers of
Ex·Municipal High Schools that their age of retirement \vhich \\'as applicable
to the Municipal Jfjgh School Teachers before the date of take over was
58 years, and therefore, they were protected under the agreements du.ted
30th April, 1971. ·rhe contention on behalf of the teachers of elementary
schools which were under the management of local bodies and v.·hich were
-
A
•
•
N. L. RAO 1'. KARNATAKA (Ray, C.J.)
329
taken over by the State Government that their age Of retirement was 58 years
A
before the schools were taken ovrer by the State Government under the provi·
sions of Karnataka Compulsory Primary. Educati9n (Am1;ndment an<l Miscellaneous Provjsions-) Act, 1969 and their conditions w0uld continue until
other condition was n1ade. The principal contention of the teachers of the

## Text

328
A
n
N. LAKSHMANA RA•) & ORS. ETC.
v.
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. ETC.
April 29, 1975
(A. N. RAY, C.J., K. K. MATHEW, V. R. KRISHNA IYER
AND A. C. GUPTA, JJ.J
Kurnataka State <7h·il Service (Age of Con1pulsory Retiren1e111)
Rules,
1974 and Constitution of India, 1950. Article 309 and 311-Reduction of rhe
aRe of conipulsory retirernent froni 58 to 55 years-Prescribing age of supe.r~
C
annuation, if an1ounts 10 re1noval or termination.
D
E
F
Mysore CO!npulsory Prbnary EducaHon Act, 1969, Section 14(b)-Teachcrs
of pritnary schools beconiing eniployees of State Gi0J-·en11nent-Conditions of
seri•ice to continue· "r,ntil ·other pro1•ision is 1nade"-Section 14(b), if tempo·
rary .and transitional--Conditions, if can be altered by the Governor.
The new State of Mysore came into existence on 1 November, 1956, con·
sequent upon the reorganisation of States brought about by the States Rcorga·
nisation Act, 1956. The reorganised new State consisted of the fonner State
of Mysore, part of the former State of Bombay, part of the fonncr State of
llyderabad, part of the former State of Madras and the ccntrn11y- administered
tcrritorj.i of Coorg. There are three categories of teachers \vho are parties
to these appeals. One group consists of primary and secondary school teachers
in Government schools of the former State of Mysore. The second group
consists of teachers in the schools belonging to various local authorities situated
in the area of the former State of Mysoce.
These teachers were absorbed
in Government service of the new State of Mysore when the said schools were
taken over by the Ciovemment. The third group- cortsists of teachers in the
schools of the School Boards in the Bombay area and the Madra<J area of
the: new State. They \\·ere absorbed in Government service under the J\-fysore
Compulsory PrimJ.ry Education Act, 1969.
On 24 February, 1974, the Karnataka State Civil Service (Age of Con1pulsory Retirement) Rules, 1974 came into existence in exercise of powers
·under Article 309 of the Constitution. These rules provided that notwithstand·
ing anything to the contrary contained in any law, ruie, notification, order or
agreement C\'ery Government servant referred to in sub-rule ( 4) whose :.ige
of compulsory retirement is 58 years shall retire on <:.ttaining the age of
55 years. It was also provided by those Rules that those who continued in
service after attaining the age of 55 years on the date of the promulgation
of the l{ules would retire on the date on which they attained the age of 58 years
G
or l April, 1974 v;·hichever is earlier. It is also stated that those who ,.,.-jll
attain the age of 55 years after the commencement of these Rules, but on or
before 1 April, 1974 would retire on 1 April, 1974. Those who \Vi11 attain 55
years after 1 April, 1974 shall retire on attaining the age of 55 years. The Govern·
ment servant was defined in 1974 Age of Compulsory Retirement Rules to
mean six classes of Government servants. The three categories of teachers who
are parties to these appeals are all covered by the nlles.
ll
It was contended on behalf of the Ex·Mysore Primary and Secondary
·
School teachers that they had their age of retirement at 58 years and they
were protected under the proviso to sub·section (7) of section 115 of the
States Reorganisation Act. It was contended on behalf of the teachers of
Ex·Municipal High Schools that their age of retirement \vhich \\'as applicable
to the Municipal Jfjgh School Teachers before the date of take over was
58 years, and therefore, they were protected under the agreements du.ted
30th April, 1971. ·rhe contention on behalf of the teachers of elementary
schools which were under the management of local bodies and v.·hich were
-
A
•
•
N. L. RAO 1'. KARNATAKA (Ray, C.J.)
329
taken over by the State Government that their age Of retirement was 58 years
A
before the schools were taken ovrer by the State Government under the provi·
sions of Karnataka Compulsory Primary. Educati9n (Am1;ndment an<l Miscellaneous Provjsions-) Act, 1969 and their conditions w0uld continue until
other condition was n1ade. The principal contention of the teachers of the •
~Iunicipal and Taluk Development Board High Schools which were taken
over by .the State Government under written agreements made by the rclc·
vant local body v;·as that the condition which w·as offered by the Government
and accepted by these teachers "shaH not be altered to their disadvantage"
B
· by virtue of sc.ction 14(b) of the
~1ysore Compulsory Prim::iry Education
Act, 1969. One of their conditions of service before the schools were taken -
ove,r by the State Government \\·as the age of retirement of teachers at 58
years.
Rejecting the contentions and dismissing the appeals :
FIELD : .(i) This Court has held that prescribing an age of superannuation
C
doe-S not amount to an action under Article 311 of the Constitution. Article
'i.
309 confers· l~gislative power to provide conditioni, ot service. ,The legislature
can regulate conditioμs of service by law \Vhich can impair conditions or
terms of seivice. it, therefore, follows that teachers \Vho exercised the form
of option \Vere subject to change in the conditions of service under Rules
framed under Article jQ9. There is no constitutional limitation to reduce the
age of retirement. ·A Government servant e-njoys the status of a Govenuncnt
servant. He cannot be removed and •his . services cannot be terminated except
D
in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. Fixing an age of retire·
ment does not amount to removal of termination.
[333H, 334- & 335A]
Roshan Lal Tandon v. Union of India [1968}1 S.C.R. 185; B. S. Vadera v.
Union of India & Ors. f1968) 3 S.C.R. 575 and Bislzun /\larai11 Mishra v. Stare
of Uttar Pradesh & Others [1~65] 1 S.C.R. 693, relied on :
Gurdev Singh Sidhu v. State of Puniab & Others [1964] 7 S.C.R. 587 and
State of Mysore v. Pad111ant1bhaclzarya [1966] 1 S.C.R. 994, ,referred to.
E
(ii) The 1969 Act provided in section 14 transfer of primary schools
managed by the municipal rouncils and panchayats in the Madras area and
Bellary District before the appointed day.
Teachers of those schoo]s became
employees of the State Government. The provision contained in section· 14(b)
of the 1969 A.ct is a temporaiy and transitional provision \Vhich continues
until other provision is made. The Legislature does not say until other proviF
sion is made because the Legislature is always free to legislate. The words
··u~til other provision is made" mean provision ·which can be made by the
legislature or by the Governor or the executive. The words "until other provit
sion is made" do not exclusively limit to legislate. If the legislature has occupied
the field the Governor has co-equal power. 'J'be power of the Governor is
co-extensive with the legislative po\\'er.
[335 BCDH]
B. S. Vadera v. Union of India & Ors. L1968] 3 S.C.R. 575, refe1Ted to.
~~tion 14(b). of the 1969 .Act is not a law regul<lting recruitment and
cond1hons of sery1ce under Article 309. Assuming it is, Article 309 does not
pre~lude the legislature from making provision prescribing conditions or re·
cru1tment and conditions of service by Rules. It is equally open to ·the Jegislature to provide tha~ in certain ronditions the Governor acting under the proviso
may make appropnate rules. The po1,ver under the proviso is co-extensive with
the power under the main part. [335F-H]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION :
Civil Appeals Nos. 19191931, 1932-34, 1959-84, 1985, 1986, 1987-89 1991-2007 &
2043 of 1974.
'
From the judgment dated 18-J 0-197 4 of
the High Comt of
Bangalore in Writ Petitions Nos. 1019, 865, 1118, 1157, 1197, 2522,
G
H
330
SUPRE.ME COURT REPORTS
[1975] SUPP. S.C.R.
A 2584, 2904, 3576, 4029, 5662, 1170 & 3204 of 1974.
A. K. Sen (In C. A. No. 1919 of 1974) Rama Jois, (In C. As.
1919-31) & (W.P. No. 249/74), P. R. Ramasesh (In C.As. Nos.
1919-31)
and R. B. Datar, for the appellants
(In C.As. Nos.
1919-31, 1987, 1988, 1991-2007, 2043) & petitioner (In W.P.
n No. 249 of 1974).
.
S. Laksluni11aras11, for the petitioners (In C.As. Nos. 193'.!-34).
Rama Joie and S. S. Khanduja, for the appellants (I~ C.As. Nos.
1959-84/74).
C
Narayan Nettar, for the appellants (In C. As. Nos.
1985-86(
1974).
V. !. Francis, for respondents Nos. 4-8 &, 10 (In C.A. 1983).
F. S. Nari111a11, Additional Solicitor General, (Jn C.A. No. 1919)
D K. S. Puttaswamy, (fo C.A. No. 1919/74) & (W.P. No. 249/74)
and M. Veerappa, for State of Karnataka in all the matters.
E
A. R. Somnath Tyer, N. D. Kurlarni (Jn W.P. No. 21/75) and
Ra111a Jois and R. B. Datar, for applicant/Intervener/Writ Petitioner.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
RAY, C.J .-These appeals by certificate turn on the question as.
to whether the Karnataka State Civil Services (Age of Compulsory
Retirement) Rules, 1974 are valid.
These cases may be broadly classified into three categories. One
F
group consists of primary and secondary school teachers in Government schools of the former State of Mysone. The 5econd group consists
of teachers in \he schools belonging to various local authorities situate·
in the area of the former State of Mysore. These teachers were absorbed in Government service of the new State of Mysore when the said
schools were taken over by the Government. The third group consists of teachers in the schools of the School Boards in the Bombay
G area and the Madras area of the new State. They were absorbed in
Government service under the Mysore Compulsory Primary Education Act, 1969.
The new State of Mysore came into existence on 1 November,.
[ 956 consequent upon the reorganisation of States brought about by
the States Reorganisation Act, 1956. The reorganised new State conn sistcd of the former State of Mysore part of the former State of
Bombay, part of the former State of Hyderabad, part of the former
State of Madras and the centrally administered territory of Coorg .
. Sections l l 4 and 115 of the States Reorganisation Act deal with
•
allotment and transfer of State Services of the merged parts of the
'-
•
new State.
'
. ..
'
N. L. RAO v.·KARNATAKA (Ray, C.J.)
331
· The School teachers of the former State of Mysore were allotted
A
to the new State of Mysore with effect from 1 January, 1956. Their
age .of retirem~no under the Mysore Services Regulations was 5 8
years. Some time in the year .1957 the State Government reduced their
age of retirement .to 55·years . .The teachers challenged the· reduced age
of retirement. This Court in State of Mysore v. Padmanabhacharya
(1966) 1 S.C.R. 994 UJ?held the contention of the teachers that the
B
age of retirement as fixed by the State was illegal. It may be stated
here that the State did not obtain the prior approval of the Central
Government under section 115 (7) of the States RcorganisatioQ Act
in regard to the reduction of the age of compulsory retirement.
By notification dated 14 April, 1966 the age of retirement of
primary and s.econdary school teachers in the new State was fixed at
58 vears with effect from 5 April, 1966. The age of retirement of
teachers who were allotted from other integn1ted areas was 55 years.
By nqtification dated 15 April, 1966 a uniform treatment was given
to all the Primary and Secondary School Teachers of the new State
c
of Mysore by fixing their age of retirement at 58 years.
·
· ,D
By noti(ication dated 10 July, 1970 the age of retirement of teachers in the Collegiate and Technical Education Department was
raised to 58 years.
By notification dated 6 'May, 1971 the retirement age of teaching staff of the Medical and Dental Colleges and other colleges under
E
the Department of Health and Family Planning Services wa~ raised
to 58 years.
By another notification dated 24 June, 1971 the age of retirement
of the members of the teaching staff of the Law Colleges was raised
to 58 years.
F
By another notification dated 5 August, 1972 the age of retirement of the members of the Judicial Service was raised to 58 years.
The Karnataka Civil Services
(Twenty-Second Amendment)
Rules, 1973 provided the age of retirement of all teachers in all the
Departments except Ex-Mysore Primary and Secondary School Teachers at 55 years.
The teachers of the erstwhile local authorities were not covered
G
by the Karnataka Civil Services {Twenty-Second Amendment) Rules,
1973 as they were governed either by contract or by special laws.
Thcir age of retirement was 58 years. They were asked to retire on
H
attaining 55 years. They filed writ petition challenging the reduction
in age of retirement.
The Mvsore Service (Amendment) Regulations 1974 were promulgated on. 21 January, 1974 reducing the age of retirement of ExMysore teachers from 58 to 55 years.
'
332
SUPREME COURT REl'ORTS
(1975) SUPP• S.C.R.
A
The Mysore Civil Service Regulations 1974 were made in exercise
of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution and with the previous approval of the Central Government under
the proviso to sub-section (7) of section. 115 of the States Reorganisation Act. These Mysore Civil Service Regulations 1974 provided that
every Government servant governed by the provisions of note 4 below
B clause (c) of Article 294 of the Mysore Civil Service Regulations
would retire on attaining the age of 55 years and those who were continued in service after attaining the age of 55 years on the date of the
Regulations would retire on attaining the age of 58 years or I March,
1974 whichever is earlier.
C
The Mysore Civil Service (Amendment) Regulations, 1974 thus
reduced the age. of retirement of Ex-Mysore teachers also to 55 years.
On 24 February, 1974 the Karnataka State Civil Services (Age
of Compulsory Retirement)
Rules, 1974 came
into existence in
exercise· of powers under Article 309 of the Constitution. The KarD nataka State Civil Services (Age of Compulsory Retirement) Rules,
197-1 provided that notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained
in ai:iy Jaw,. rule, notification, order or agreement every Govcrnn1~nt
servant refcn-cd to in sub-rule ( 4) whose age of compulsory retirement is 58 years shall retire on attaining the age of 55 years. It was
also provided by those Rules that those who continued in service after
attaining the age of 5 5 years on the date of the promulgation of the
E Rules would retire on the date on which they attained the age of
58 years or 1 April, 1974 whichever is earlier. It is also stated that
those who will attain the age of 55 years after the commcncemeht of
these Rules, hut on or before 1 April, 1974 would retire on 1 April,
1974. Those who will attain 55 years after 1 April, 1974 shall retire
on attaining the age of 55 years. The Government servant was defined
F
in 1974 Age of Compulsory Retirement Rules to mean six classes
of Government servants. The three categories of teachers who are
parties to these appea!S arc all covered by the Karnataka State Civil
Service (Age of. Compu.lsory Retirement) Rules, 1974 which are
referred to as the impugned Rulcs.
The Ex-Mysore primary and secondary school teachers contend
G
that they had their age of retirement at 58 years and they were protected under the proviso to sub-section (7) of section 115 of the
States Rcorganisatim1 Act. The teachers of Ex-Municipal High School
taken over under orders of the Government and agreements made by
the Government dated 30 April. 1971 contended that their age of
retirement which was applicable to the Municipal High School teachers
before the date of take over was 58 years, and, therefore, they were
· B protected under the agreements. The teachers of elementary schools
which were under the management of local bodies and which were
taken over by the State Government contended that their age of retirement was 58 years before the schools were taken over by the State
Government under the provisions of Karnataka Compulsory Primary
Education (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1969
and their conditions would continue until other condition was made.
,>
N. L. RAO v. KARNAtAKA (Ray, C.J.)
333
The teachers of the Municipal and Taluk Development Board
A
High Schools which wete taken over by. the State Govenunent under
written agreements made .by the relevant local body contended that
they became Government servants by . the ·exercise of option form
accepting the terms and conditions .offered by the Government in their
order dated 30 April, 197 L These teachers also conte-nded that the
option was incorporated in the agreement between the State Govet11"
B
ment and the relevant local body under whom they were employed. The
princip~I ~Qntention of t)lese te~chers was that the condition which
was offered by the Government atid accepted by these teachers of the
relevant local body was that the conditions of service «if these teachers
"shall not l)e altered to their dis~dvantagc". One of their conditions
of service before the schools were taken over by the State. Government was the age oJ rcth:cment of teachers at 58 years. Under the
C
impugned Rules these teachers were required to retire at the age of
55 years notwithstanding the fact that their age of retirement under
the agteemcnt was 58 years.
·
The Government Order dated 30 April, 1971 stated that all employees of the Local Authorities would become Government servants
with effect from the date of transfer and their conditions of service
would not .be varied to their disadvantage consequent on their transfer to Government cpntrol. The Government order dated 30 April,
1971 further provided that the employees of local bodies and Secondary schools would_ be absorbed in Government service only if they
agreed in writing to the forms. By the form is meant the form of option.
The form of option contained two forms. One was whereby the teachers agreed to be absorbed in Government service and the other
where the teachers did not agree to be absorbed in; Government service. Those who agreed to be absorbed in Government service stated
that the terms and conditions laid down by Government regarding
absorption of the members of the staff of local body in Government
service consequent on the take over of the local body to the control
of Government were gone through and they agreed to be absorbed
in Government service. The agreement between the Government and
the rele\·ant school of the local body pmvided that the service conditions of teaching and non-teaching employees of the local bcdies shall
not be varied to their disadvantage consequent on their transfer to
Government control.
E
As a result of tl1e exercise of option by the teachers of the local
booies they· became Government servants. The term that tl)e service
conditions would not he varied to their disadvantage would mean that
F
G
thev would be like all other Government servants subject to Article
310(1) of the Constitution. This could mean that under the law these
teachers would, be entitled to continue in service. up to ihe age of
supetannuation. The exercise of option does not mean that there was
H
a contract whereby a limitation was put on prescribing an age of superannuation. It has been held by this Court that prescribing an age of
superannuation does not amount to a~ act.ion under Article.~11 of_th.e
Constitution. Article 309 confers legislahve power to provide con?ttions of service. The Legislature can regulate conditions of service
by law which can impair conditions_ or terms of service.
334
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1975] SUPP· s.c.R.
A
This Court in Roshan Lal Tandon v. Union of India (1968)
1 S.C.R. 185 said that there is no vested contractual right in regard
to the terms of service. The legal position of a Government servant is
one of status than of contract. The duties of status are fixed by law.
The terms of service are governed by statute or statutory rules which
may be unilaterally altered by the Government without the consent
B of the employee.
The form of option is the contract. This exercise of option is
itself the contract. The option is to be absorbed or not to be atsorl:Jed.
The contractual term is that the teacher will be absorbed as a Government servant. The term in the agreement between the Government
C and the Local Body that the conditions of service will not be varied
to the disadvantage of the teachers has been read by all teachers
who exercised the option to be absorbed. The conditions of service
referred to therein arc the conditions of service of the State of Mysore.
In B. S. Vadera v.
Union of India & Ors.
(1968)
3 S.C.R.
575 this Court held that if an appropriate legislature has passed an
, D Act under Article 309 the Rules framed under the proviso t0 Article
309 would have effect subject to that Act. In the absence of any Act
of the appropciate legislature the Rules made by the President or such
person as he may direct, are to have full effect.
There is legislative power under Entry 41, List H to legislate for
State public services. There is no fetter on the legislative power, to
E legislate with regard to service or with regarxl to any other matier
mentioned in the Legislative List . .In Gurde.v Singh Sidhu v. State of
Punjab & Anr. (1964) 7 S.C.R. 587 this Court stated that there
were two exceptions to the protection afforded by Article 311.. One
is where a permanent public servant is asked to retire on the ground
that he has reached the age of superannuation which is reasonably
F
fixed. The other is where a public servant is compulsorily retired un'<ler
the Rules which prescribe the normal age of superannuation and provide reasonably long period of qualified service after whjch compulsory
retirement could be valid. It is only when a rule is framed prescribing
a proper age of superannuation and another rule is framed giving
power to the State to retire a permanent public servant compulsorily
at the end of 10 years of his service that this Court has apprehended
G such cases to be not within the protection of Article 311.
The question of retirement age was considered by this Court in
Bishun Narain Mishra v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
(1965)
1 S.C.R. 693. The State Goverrunent in that case raised the age of
superannuation from 55 to 58 years and again reduced the age to 55
years. It was held that there is no provision which takes away power
of the Government to increase or reduce the age of superannuation.
H When the rule only deals with the age of superannuation and the
Government servant had to retire because of the reduction in the age
of superannuation it cannot be said that the termination of the service
amounts to removal within the meaning of Article 311.
It, therefore, follows that teachers who exercised the form of option
were subject to change in the conditions of service under Rules framed
N. L. RAO v. KAR1'ATAKA (Ray, C.J.)
ns
under Article 309. There is no· constitutional limitation to. reduce the
A
age of retirement. A Government servant enjoys the status of a Government servant. He cannot be removed and his services cannot be
terminated except in accordance with. the provisions of the Constitution. Fixing an age of retirement does not amount to removal or termination.
The teachers of primary schools conterided that their terms of
service were continued by Mysore Compulsory Primary Education
Act, 1969, and, therefore, their age of retirement could not be altered
by rules made by the Governor under Article 309. The 1969 Act
provided in. section 14 trausfer of primary schools managed by the
municipal. councils and panchayats in the Madras area an<l Bellary
l)istrict before the appointed day. Teachers of those schools became
employees of the State Government. The crucial words in section
14(b) of the 1969 Act on which the teachers relied are these: "All
primary school teachers .................. shall, until other provision is
B
made, receive the salary and allowances and be subject to the condition of service to which they were entitled immediately before the
appointed day". The words "other provision is made". were construed
by the teachers to mean an act of legislature.
D
The provision contained in section 14(b) of the 1969 Act is a
temporary and transitio.nal provision which continues until other provision is made. The Legislature does not say until other provision is
made because the Legislature is always free to legislate. The words
"until other provision is made" mean provision which can be made
by the legislature or by the Governor or the executive. The words
"until other provision is made" do not exclusively limit to legislate.
If the legislature has occupied the field the Governor has co-equal
power .. The power of the Governor is co-extensive with the legislative
power (See B. S. Vaderds case (supra) at page 583).
Section ! 4(b) of the 1969 Act is not a law regulating recruitment
and conditions of service under Article 309. Assuming it is, Article
309 does not preclude the legislature from making provision for prescribing conditions of rccruit'!lent and conditions of service by Rules.
The proviso to Article 309 contemplates that Rules regulating conditions of service may be made under an enactment. Just as it is open
to the appropriate legislature to provide for rules to be framed for
regulating recruitment and conditions of service under Article 309,
it is equally open to the legislature to provide that in certain conditions the Governor acting under the proviso may make appropriate
rules. The power under the proviso is co-extensive with the power
under the main part.
(See B. S. Vadera's case (supra) at pp. 585586).
For these reasons, the contentions of the teachers fail. The impugned
legislation is constitutionally valid. The appeals are dismissed. ~arties
will pay and bear the.ir own costs.
Appeals dismissed.
0 V.M.K.
E
F
G
H