STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. versus DILIP KUMAR AND ANR

STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. versus DILIP KUMAR AND ANR

Respondents appointed as Nagar Shikshaks after 1 July 2006 are governed by the 2006 Rules and are not entitled to appointment on regular government posts or pay scales. Having accepted appointments as Nagar Shikshaks, it is not open to them to claim government service. No executive instruction could supersede the rules. High Court erred in directing appointment to regular government service.

Parties
Appellant: State of Bihar and Ors.; Respondent: Dilip Kumar and Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 30.03.2015 Affirming Grant of Compassionate Appointment; Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside.
Legal Topics
Compassionate Appointment, Interpretation of Service Rules, Relevance of Executive Instructions, Bihar Municipal Body Elementary Teachers (employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Bihar and Ors.

Appellant

Dilip Kumar and Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 30.03.2015 Affirming Grant of Compassionate Appointment; Supreme Court Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether respondents, appointed after 1 July 2006 under Rule 10 of the 2006 Rules, are entitled to regular government service and pay scales or only Nagar Shikshak posts with fixed emoluments
  2. 2 Whether executive instructions can override statutory rules

Ratio Decidendi

Respondents appointed as Nagar Shikshaks after 1 July 2006 are governed by the 2006 Rules and are not entitled to appointment on regular government posts or pay scales. Having accepted appointments as Nagar Shikshaks, it is not open to them to claim government service. No executive instruction could supersede the rules. High Court erred in directing appointment to regular government service.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside.

Orders

  • Judgment and order of the High Court dated 30 March 2015 is set aside.
  • Liberty granted to respondents to approach the State Government for suitable relief as per relevant orders.