# STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS v. LABHU RAM & ORS

- **Citation:** [1977] 1 S.C.R. 832
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1976-10-15
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 1745 of 1968
- **Bench:** M. H. Beg, P. N. Shjnghal
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/state-of-punjab-ors-v-labhu-ram-ors-6982
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

Punjab Civil Service Rules, Vol. I, Rules 2.49 and 3.10
to
3.16,-.!imior
Vernacular Cadre teachers ofjicidling in senior vemaculai· cadre cntit/edeto benefit
of their substantive posts.
The respondents, teachers of the Junior vernacular cadre, Punjab, were promoted to the senior vernacular cadre temporarily. After the expiry ~f their probationary period, they were not confirmed, but continued to work in the senior
cadre, and their names were dropped from the junior vernacular cadre. Meanwhile, other teachers, junior to the respondents in the .iunior cadre, were offered
better opportunities of being taken in a "selection grade". The respondents filed
a writ petitiori in the High Court contending that they were entitled to the opportunity of moving into the selection grade, as they were neither probationers nor
confirmed members but were only officiating in the senior cadre while retaining
their substantive places and liens in the junior cadre. The High Court allowed
the writ.
Dismissing the appeal the Court,
HELD: The state was unable to substantiate the submission that the petitioners-respondents became probationers in the senior vernacular cadre. According tQ the rules, their lien in the junior vernacular cadre was retained by them,
and, it could not be suspended by the mere fact that they were performing the
duties of teachers working in the senior vernacular cadre. [836 D-EJ
CrvrL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1745 of 1968.
(Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgr.aent and Order dated
13-10-1967 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ
No. 1113 of 1966).
0. P. Shanna, for the appellants.
S. K. Mehta, K. R. Nagaraja and P. N. Puri, for the Respondents.
The Jud~ent of the Court was delivered by
BEG, J.-The State of Punjab has come up
by special leave
against the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court
oE
Punjab & Haryana allowing the Writ petition of the respondents who,
it is admitted by the State, are teachers of the Junior Vernacular
grade working, on the dates on which they file<\ the Writ petition, as
"promotees" in the senior vernacular grade temporarily but had not
been confirmed there. It appears that the only difference between
the junior vernacular cadre and the senior vernacular cadre is that
those who teach lower classes were placed in the "junior" cadre and
those who teach higher classes were in the "senior vernacular cadre".
But, for some reason, working in senior vernacular cadre was considered a promotion.
After consideration of the whole position, the
two grades were integrated by the Government from
1st October,
1957, with retrospective effect, under the Punjab Educational Service
(
...
..
~>
i
J
.--,
'.
~.
PUNJAB V. LABHU RAM (Beg, J,)
833
(Provincialised Cadre) Class III Service Rules, 1961.
This meant
that the Government recognised that both the cadres should be really
considered as one and that there were no acceptable grounds for a
differentiation.
Nevertheless, it appears that the names of the petitioners were dropped from the junior vernacular cadre as they had
been working for more than the probationary period in the senior
vemaclllar cadre. It is urged· that it must be deemed that they were
confirnied in the senior vernacular cadre automatically.
However,
they had to be "probationers" in the senior cadre for such a result to
enure. '"We fail to see how they become "probationers" there.
Curiously, the prospects of those who were not considered "promoted" tOt the senior vernacular cadrei and were junior to the petitioners respondents in that cadre, improved as
they were offered
opportunities of being taken _in a "selection grade".
But, no such
opportunities were offered to the petitioners on the ground that they
had been removed from the junior vernacular cadre.
The names of
the petitioners respondents had been automatically dropped from the
cadre in which they held their liens having been appointed there
initially permanently.
The High Court of Punjab & Haryaua held that

## Text

A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
832
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
v.
LABHU RAM & ORS.
October 15, 1976
[M. H. BEG AND P. N. SHJNGHAL, JJ.j
Punjab Civil Service Rules, Vol. I, Rules 2.49 and 3.10
to
3.16,-.!imior
Vernacular Cadre teachers ofjicidling in senior vemaculai· cadre cntit/edeto benefit
of their substantive posts.
The respondents, teachers of the Junior vernacular cadre, Punjab, were promoted to the senior vernacular cadre temporarily. After the expiry ~f their probationary period, they were not confirmed, but continued to work in the senior
cadre, and their names were dropped from the junior vernacular cadre. Meanwhile, other teachers, junior to the respondents in the .iunior cadre, were offered
better opportunities of being taken in a "selection grade". The respondents filed
a writ petitiori in the High Court contending that they were entitled to the opportunity of moving into the selection grade, as they were neither probationers nor
confirmed members but were only officiating in the senior cadre while retaining
their substantive places and liens in the junior cadre. The High Court allowed
the writ.
Dismissing the appeal the Court,
HELD: The state was unable to substantiate the submission that the petitioners-respondents became probationers in the senior vernacular cadre. According tQ the rules, their lien in the junior vernacular cadre was retained by them,
and, it could not be suspended by the mere fact that they were performing the
duties of teachers working in the senior vernacular cadre. [836 D-EJ
CrvrL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1745 of 1968.
(Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgr.aent and Order dated
13-10-1967 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ
No. 1113 of 1966).
0. P. Shanna, for the appellants.
S. K. Mehta, K. R. Nagaraja and P. N. Puri, for the Respondents.
The Jud~ent of the Court was delivered by
BEG, J.-The State of Punjab has come up
by special leave
against the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court
oE
Punjab & Haryana allowing the Writ petition of the respondents who,
it is admitted by the State, are teachers of the Junior Vernacular
grade working, on the dates on which they file<\ the Writ petition, as
"promotees" in the senior vernacular grade temporarily but had not
been confirmed there. It appears that the only difference between
the junior vernacular cadre and the senior vernacular cadre is that
those who teach lower classes were placed in the "junior" cadre and
those who teach higher classes were in the "senior vernacular cadre".
But, for some reason, working in senior vernacular cadre was considered a promotion.
After consideration of the whole position, the
two grades were integrated by the Government from
1st October,
1957, with retrospective effect, under the Punjab Educational Service
(
...
..
~>
i
J
.--,
'.
~.
PUNJAB V. LABHU RAM (Beg, J,)
833
(Provincialised Cadre) Class III Service Rules, 1961.
This meant
that the Government recognised that both the cadres should be really
considered as one and that there were no acceptable grounds for a
differentiation.
Nevertheless, it appears that the names of the petitioners were dropped from the junior vernacular cadre as they had
been working for more than the probationary period in the senior
vemaclllar cadre. It is urged· that it must be deemed that they were
confirnied in the senior vernacular cadre automatically.
However,
they had to be "probationers" in the senior cadre for such a result to
enure. '"We fail to see how they become "probationers" there.
Curiously, the prospects of those who were not considered "promoted" tOt the senior vernacular cadrei and were junior to the petitioners respondents in that cadre, improved as
they were offered
opportunities of being taken _in a "selection grade".
But, no such
opportunities were offered to the petitioners on the ground that they
had been removed from the junior vernacular cadre.
The names of
the petitioners respondents had been automatically dropped from the
cadre in which they held their liens having been appointed there
initially permanently.
The High Court of Punjab & Haryaua held that the petitioners
respondents are entitled to the benefit of their substantive posts, which
were still in the junior vernacular cadre, as they were never confirmed
in the senior vernacular cadre whatever may be the sentimental satisfaction of being considered as persons "promoted" to and working in
the "senior vernacular cadre". Subsequent events showed that those
who are junior to the petitioners, and, for that reason, did not get
the opportunity of serving in the "senior" cadre, had better opportu!lities offered to them without any reasonable ground of discrimination between. the two cadres except that the petitioners were seniors
and could consider themselv~s "promoted" because they had been
performing the duties of teachers of the "senior" cadre.
The petitioners,, after discovering that those
who were junior to them and
had, therefore, not been given the opportunity
of
serving in the
senior vernacular cadre, had a better opportunity of moving into the
selection grade,
which had not been offered to them,
applied for
this very opportunity as they still continued in their substantive posts
which were in the junior vernacular cadre.
They took up the correct
position that they had merely been officiating in the senior vernacular cadre but their-right places were in the junior vernacular cadre.
The mere fact that they worked in the senior cadre for longer periods
than probationers would
could not give them the status of either
mere prot•ationers or persons confirmed in the senior
vernacular
cadre.
They could not, for that reason alone, be deprived of the
benefits of their substantive appointments in the junior vernacular
cadre.
Hence, their Writ Petitions were allowed
and they were
afforded all the benefits which would have accrued to them as members of the junior vernacular cadre to which they did not really cease
to belong.
Moreover, as already pointed out, the Government had
itself considered the position and had integrated the two cadres into
one with retrospective effect from 1st October, 1957.
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
834
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1977] l 3.C.R.
A ·
The position of the petitioners appears to us to be fully cmtted
by the following rules contained in the Punjab Civil Services Rules-·
Volume I:
B
c
· "3.10. Unless in any
case it be otherwise
distinctly
provided the whole time of. a Government servant is at the
disposal of the Government which pays him and he may be
employed in any manner required by proper authority,
without claim or additional remuneration. whether the services required of him are such as would ordinarily be" remunerated from Union or State revenues,
or from
the
revenues of a local fund.
•
Substantive Appointment and Lien.
3 .11. (a) Two or more Government servants cannot
be appointed substantively to the same permanent post at
the same time.
(b) A Government servant cannot be appointed subs-·
tantively except as a temporary measure, to two or more perD
manent posts at the same time ..
E
F
G
H
(c) A Government.servant cannot be appointed substantively to a post on which another G~vernment servant
holds a lien.
·
3.12. Unless in any case it be otherwise provided in
these rules, a Government servant on substantive appointment to any permanent post acquires a lien on that post
and ceases to hold any· lien previonsly acquired on any
other post.
3.13. Unless his lien is suspended under rule 3.14 or
transferred under rule 3.16, a Government servant holdfng
substantively a permanent post retains a lien on that post-
(a) while perforining the duties of that post;
(b) while on foreign service, or holding a temporary
post, or officiating in another post;
( c) during joining time on transfer to another post,
unless he is transferred substantively to a post on lower pay,
in which case his lien is transferred to the new post from
the date on which he is relieved of his dnties in the old
pos!;
(d) except as provided in Note below while on leave;
and
-
( e) while under suspension.
of
3.14. (a) A competent authority shall suspend the lien·
a Government servant on a permanent post which he
Ii.
'"
'. '
'
•
\..
·•
~
:1
- ,,
PUNJAB V. LABHU RAM (Beg, J.)
holds sl!bstantively, if he is appointed in a substantive capacity :
( 1 ) to a tenure post, or
(2) to a permanent post outside the cadre on which
he is borne. or
( 3) provisionally, to a post on which another Government servant would hold a lien, had his lien not been suspell.ded under rule.
(b) A competent authority may, at its option, suspend
the :lien of a Government servant on a permanent post
which he holds substantively if he is deputed out of India
or transferred to foreign service, or in circumsta1ices not
covered by clause (a) of this rule, is transferred, whether
in a substantive or officiating capacity, to a post in another
cadre, and if in any of thesei cases there is reason to beliexe
that he will remain absent from the post on which he
holds a lien, for a period of not less than three years.
(c) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (a)
or (b)
of this rule, a Government servant's lien on
a
tenure post may, in no circumstances, be suspended.
If
he is appointed substantively . to another
permanent post,
his lien on the tenure post must be terminated.
( d) If a Government servant's lien on a post is
suspended under clause (a) or (b) of this rule, the post may
be filled substantively, and the Government servant appointed
to hold it substantively shall acquire a lien on it : Provided
that the arrangements shall be reversed as soon as the suspended lien revives.
(e) A Government servant's lien which has been suspended under clause (a) of this rule shall revive as soon
as he ceases to hold a lien on a post of the nature specified in sub-clause (1), ( 2) on ( 3) of that clause.
(f) A Government servant's lien which has been suspended under clause (b) of this rule shall revive as soon as
he ceases to ~e on deputation out of India or on foreign service or to hold a post in another cadre : Provided
that a suspended lien shall not revive because the Government servant takes leave if there is reason to believe that
he will, on return from leave, continue to be on deputation
out of India or on foreign service or to hold a post in another cadre and the total period of absence on duty will
not fall short of three years or that he will hold substantively a post of the nature specified in sub-clause ( 1), (2) or
(3) of clause (a).
·
3.15. (a) Except as provided in clause
(c) of this
rule and in note under rule 3.13, a Government servant's
835
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
A
B
c
D
836
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1977] l S.C.R.
lien on a post may, in no circumstances, be terminated,
even with his consent, if the result will be to leave him without a lien or a suspended lien upon a permanent post.
(b) In a case covered by sub-clause (2) of clause (a)
of. rule 3.14 the suspended lien may not,
except on the
written request of the Government servant concerned, be
terminated while the
Government servant
remains
m
Government service.
(c) Notwithstanding the provrn1ons of rule
3.14(a),
the lien of a 5}overnment servant holding substantively a
permanent post shall be termina!ed on his appointment e"Ubstantively to the post of Chiefl Engineer of the Public Works
Departm~nt.
3.16. Subject to the provisions of rule 3.17, a: competent authority may transfer to anothel' permanent post in
the same cadre the lien of a Government servant who is
not performing the duties of a post to which the lien relates, even if that lien has been suspended."
According to the rules set out above, the lien of the petitioners
in the junior vernacular cadre was retained by them. and it could not
be suspended by the m.~re fact that they were performing the duties
of teachers working in the senior vernacular cadre.
Nothing beyond this was disclosed by the facts oli these cases.
E
The definition of a probationer, given in; rule 2.49 is as follows
F
G
H
"2.49. Probationer means a Government servant employed on probation in or against a substantive vacancy in the
cadre of a department.
This term does
not,
however,
cover a Government servant who holds
substantively
a
permanent post in a cadre and
is merely
appointed 'on
probation' to another post''.
Learned Counsel for the State was unable to substantiate the suh·
mission that the petitioners respondents wero merely probationers in
the senior vernacular cadre and not really persons whose substantive posts were in the junior vernacular cadre, appointed to perfonn
the duties of persons put in another cadre.
Their duties in
the
senior cadre involved teaching
somewhat
higher classes.
This
:additional experience could not reasonably be looked up as a dis·
qualification for the selection· grade.
The High Court had, therefore,. given the petitioner-respondents the benefits of the cadre on
which their names should have been retained.
Moreover, this is
not a question which can arise again as the two different cadres have
been merged with retrospective effect from 1st October, 1957.
It
meant that they were entitled to be considered for the selection grade.
and, if they satisfy .the requirements for selection to get the benefits
of it.
Consequently, we dismiss this appeal with costs.
M.R.
Appeal dismissed.
•
--
'-'-
~
{
•
· /-