MAHESH KUMAR MUDGIL versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

MAHESH KUMAR MUDGIL versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

Since both the creation and abolition of the temporary post were carried out with the mandatory concurrence of the Finance Department under the Rules of Business, they were valid acts of the appropriate authority. The appellant did not acquire a right to confirmation or to retain the post after abolition; the temporary post lapsed due to non-extension and withdrawal of financial sanction. There is no legal bar to the use or abolition of such posts by the Secretariat Administration.

Parties
Appellant: MAHESH KUMAR MUDGIL; Respondents: STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 December 1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Order of Allahabad High Court, Dated 27.4.1989, Dismissing Writ Petition
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Abolition of Temporary Post, Extension and Financial Sanction for Government Posts, Authority Over Government Service Posts, Cadre and Establishment Powers, Confirmation Rights of Temporary Government Servants
Service Law Abolition of Temporary Post Extension and Financial Sanction for Government Posts Authority Over Government Service Posts Cadre and Establishment Powers Confirmation Rights of Temporary Government Servants

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MAHESH KUMAR MUDGIL

Appellant

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Order of Allahabad High Court, Dated 27.4.1989, Dismissing Writ Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a temporary post created in the cadre of one Government department can be abolished by another department of the State Government
  2. 2 Whether a government servant holding a temporary post for more than three years acquires the right to be confirmed against the said post, by conversion into a permanent one
  3. 3 Whether Secretariat Administration (Establishment) had jurisdiction to abolish the post created in the cadre of Harijan and Social Welfare Department

Ratio Decidendi

Since both the creation and abolition of the temporary post were carried out with the mandatory concurrence of the Finance Department under the Rules of Business, they were valid acts of the appropriate authority. The appellant did not acquire a right to confirmation or to retain the post after abolition; the temporary post lapsed due to non-extension and withdrawal of financial sanction. There is no legal bar to the use or abolition of such posts by the Secretariat Administration.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • High Court's decision upheld; writ petition remains dismissed.
  • Appellant directed to pay costs.