GYAN CHAND versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

GYAN CHAND versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

The appellant, having continued in Group 'B' post not only in the ordinary scale but also in the senior scale for 10 years, was serving in a substantive capacity as Group 'B' officer. He could not simultaneously continue in Group 'C' post in a substantive capacity. Therefore, the proviso to Rule 1802 does not apply to his case, and the order of compulsory retirement is not vitiated by any error of law.

Parties
Appellant: Gyan Chand; Respondents: Union of India and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 December 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Railway Establishment Code, Compulsory Retirement
Service Law Railway Establishment Code Compulsory Retirement

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gyan Chand

Appellant

Union of India and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the proviso to Rule 1802 of the Railway Establishment Code upon his compulsory retirement as a Group 'B' railway officer

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant, having continued in Group 'B' post not only in the ordinary scale but also in the senior scale for 10 years, was serving in a substantive capacity as Group 'B' officer. He could not simultaneously continue in Group 'C' post in a substantive capacity. Therefore, the proviso to Rule 1802 does not apply to his case, and the order of compulsory retirement is not vitiated by any error of law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No costs