THE STATE OF MYSORE versus PADMANABHACHARYA ETC.

THE STATE OF MYSORE versus PADMANABHACHARYA ETC.

Trained teachers are entitled to continue in service until age 58 unless the competent authority finds lack of good record or inefficiency; retirement at age 55 in absence of such finding is invalid. The Governor's notification cannot retrospectively validate such retirements, as it is not a rule regulating...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: State of Mysore; Respondent: Padmanabhacharya; Respondent: Nanjappa; Respondent: O. P. Malhotra; Respondent: R. N. Sachthey
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 September 1965
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Punjab High Court Letters Patent Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Retirement Age, Superannuation, Public Service Regulations, Rule Making Power Under Constitution
Constitutional Law Service Law Retirement Age Superannuation Public Service Regulations Rule Making Power Under Constitution

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of Mysore

Appellant

Padmanabhacharya

Respondent

Nanjappa

Respondent

O. P. Malhotra

Respondent

R. N. Sachthey

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Punjab High Court Letters Patent Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Interpretation of Mysore Service Regulations rule 294(a) note 4 governing retirement age of trained teachers
  2. 2 Validity and effect of Governor's notification under Article 309 of the Constitution validating superannuation at age 55

Ratio Decidendi

Trained teachers are entitled to continue in service until age 58 unless the competent authority finds lack of good record or inefficiency; retirement at age 55 in absence of such finding is invalid. The Governor's notification cannot retrospectively validate such retirements, as it is not a rule regulating conditions of service under Article 309.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Respondents entitled to costs from appellant
  • One hearing fee granted