R. N. NANJUNDAPPA versus T. THIMMIAH & ANR.

R. N. NANJUNDAPPA versus T. THIMMIAH & ANR.

Regularisation of Dr. T. Thimmiah's appointment as Principal by a one-person rule under Article 309 was ultra vires, as it violated established rules for recruitment and appointment, and denied equal opportunity to other eligible candidates, thereby breaching Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Regularisation cannot be treated as a mode of recruitment or appointment under service rules, and government cannot make rules under Article 309 to legalise an illegal appointment or regularise it retrospectively for one individual alone.

Parties
Appellant: R. N. Nanjundappa; Respondent No. 1: T. Thimmiah; Respondent No. 2: State of Mysore
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 December 1971
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment (on Appeal From High Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Judgment of the High Court set aside; impugned rules declared void.
Legal Topics
Recruitment and Regularisation in Public Services, Article 14 and 16 Equality and Non Discrimination, Article 309 Rules for Recruitment and Conditions of Service, Validity of Rule Making Power for Individual Regularisation, Interpretation of State Civil Services Recruitment Rules
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Service Law Recruitment and Regularisation in Public Services Article 14 and 16 Equality and Non Discrimination Article 309 Rules for Recruitment and Conditions of Service Validity of Rule Making Power for Individual Regularisation Interpretation of State Civil Services Recruitment Rules

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R. N. Nanjundappa

Appellant

T. Thimmiah

Respondent No. 1

State of Mysore

Respondent No. 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment (on Appeal From High Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the regularisation of Dr. T. Thimmiah's appointment as Principal by the 1967 Rules was valid under Article 309 of the Constitution.
  2. 2 Whether the appointment breached the Mysore State Civil Services (General Recruitment) Rules, 1957 and Mysore Education Department Services (Technical Education Department) (Recruitment) Rules, 1964.
  3. 3 Whether Article 14 and 16 (equality and non-discrimination) were violated by such regularisation or appointment.

Ratio Decidendi

Regularisation of Dr. T. Thimmiah's appointment as Principal by a one-person rule under Article 309 was ultra vires, as it violated established rules for recruitment and appointment, and denied equal opportunity to other eligible candidates, thereby breaching Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Regularisation cannot be treated as a mode of recruitment or appointment under service rules, and government cannot make rules under Article 309 to legalise an illegal appointment or regularise it retrospectively for one individual alone.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Judgment of the High Court set aside; impugned rules declared void.

Orders

  • The impeached rules dated 9 February 1967 published in notification No. ED.91DGO58 are declared void.
  • No order as to costs.