: ^ ^,^^^^^^^^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUREAT BlLASPUR (C.G.) WRIT APPEAL N0.^'^ /ZOO^S' APPELLANT i.eii ^-^^^^ -Trt A. r- ^^ f^..-- '^"" 2. J^'^- /^ jj^-6^ 'Sstslrt-' RESBONDENTS l&et~^ Vjyeksananda Vidyapeeth, TtirGugh Secretary . KamakrishnaYNagar, Kota, Raipur (C.G.) O.P. Verma Secretary, Vivekananda Vidyapeeth, Raimakristtna 'Nagar, KotayRaipur;(C.G.3 VERSUS ^^5. vc^v^| til1. ?^Jf%S^ •^"!yy Saugat Banerjee S/o Shri S.C. ganerjee Agedabout33years, Occupatiori Tabla Teacher Viv&kananda Vidyapeeth, Ramakrishna^Nagar, Kota; Raipur R/QiShivanand Nagar Sector-S/P.O.WRSColony, Raipur (C.G.) { State of Chhattisgarh • f Through the Cblleetor RaipUF (C.G.) i WRIT APPEAl. UNDER SECTIOINI 2 OF •THE CHHATTISGARH HIGHCOURT f«PPEALTQI^BSIONJBENGWVACT, ZOOSI^ WITH UNDER RULE 157. CIJBkUSE ll OF THE HIGI^ lt:i@ll!)ii :aa iIB !lilB i!»W ys.-r' !ui ^h :(li . ;!! •\ XS9M •;j;|l^^^[> SSiWS 'Z'L.-' HIGH GOUR'I' OF GHHATTI^GARffi: BmASRUR . -•W.A.lNo.556f2Q68 . -• • ^—-'::^•l';~^:'- .•'^.' ^ . • ": Appellants . . • ^ Vidyapeetti & ahotlier ^'Versus.. '' • : ;;': .' ; : ^ :; '. ' • • Respdndents SaugafBanerjee &another y WRrttA£PE^E.UNSE®;SEC%©N2QKTHEGHHATTISGAI^H^ iCQU^ B>I:S.^3 HJIVISIC»BENeH):i^en'.^006^^^^ :DB: Kc?n'ble'Mr. LM. Quddusi, ^ , . , & <HonMe Mr. N.K. Agarwal, JJ. • Shri. tJitendrsE Pali.'Advocate for the app&llants. MsjE^p^iBSndey, AdyiSCafe fbr tKerespOndenf Nb.l. ;ShrisM.':KK®g®hSi6|a^Govt. AdvocEite^for fhe f^spondent Ng.2. ORDERIorall, ,;C,,',);^ssGacon^s--t5alday0fJuiiG,2010:;)j SPeTl.Sl..^v£&^siiJ. "'- 1 '.1^.-':;, !.:;' ': • ;. '-' '. •:,:1: Heard leamed iCQunsel appearuig fbr tlie appellants .as' ,well' as leamed counsel|appearingfbrtherespondents No.'l an.d 2. ; ;. A Thiswrit appeaFhas teert Eled against the irapugnedjud|grnenit!aiid order dated 30ttt July, 2007; passed bythe-Ieariied.Single Judge: ih: W.B. (S) No.' 153/2007 (S&ugatBai^eKys.^weKaSa^ Vidhyapeeth 8sf others),,;aIlQwing the wnt petitkin: in .p directing the respondents (appeUants in the'instant writ appea!l}'t6 coraplete the enquiiy against tUe respotndent Np.I (writ.petitiqner) as per the directions given in paragraph 13 of the iinpugned judgment in wliich it was held tUat the enquiry was ncit initi^tteB against the instanf respondenf ,NQ.I: in aecordanee ;witU 'j'ths provisions of I^ and the writ.aCT8U^ts ^reldirecfed^to &M the deparfmeiital enquiry from tlie^ stage 'of submissidn of \»rl|f|;ni; explanation in ^accordanee"svitU.law. . ; w^ 'M^ l)!:!i 3. 4. 5. 6< 7. Brief facts' of the ease are;tKat;the respondent N6.1 was appointed against the post of Tabla Teaeher OI-t 29.9.1997, It is Aof disputed that at the tirrie pf fais appointlnenf the respondeht No.1 was nbt qualified to hold^ fhe post of Tabla Teacher but fae;. was not appoinfed against a regular post carry^ was giyenyfl^.Gonsffidated salary^ ^ appointment was not a regular appQmfflie^and i^oinmendation fbr regulartzatioti of his appoinfinent was^ajade s'ateSeqyfinldy'. However, in the rrieantime a charge sheetr was seived^1'upsarttte cespondent No. l' artd he has ,giventhe::reply. . ; r:':; , :.:'', ;',:'^:.^^;. •''' : ., .; "' ':" Leamed Single Judge has uidicgtettrffiat'the p^^ by the writ appellant m. ''directing ,the. eriquiry .svas not in .accprdance with ttie ryles nainelyMa<ihyaPradeshAshas]^aSikshah;^ (Adhyapakon Tatha . Anya Karmachariyon Ke Padachyut Karne/Sewa.jSe:Ha±ane'Saml}atidhi'Prakr^a}^^^^'^N^ (heretn:afi:erlreferredtoas"theRules,I983).? ' The'plea taken befbre the learned Single Judge.by^ ffi^ wrif appeUant was that subsequently the R^ Saristha Anudaii Niy&iii,^ 1985 (hei-einafter referred A& asj 'MRules,, 1985") .were'applicable anditherefbre^they di8 hot fbllpw^A^ 1983. ] ,j :, ':. ..:-:• .::..../ .: . 1' . 1: /: :':.:]:/::'ll. •' . . We havs perused th&Rules ;tg85 gsweU as the Rules 1983. ' In faet thej I^es, t98§ are .silentlin : enquiryandreinoval,pf^aehers.^Tyerefore,iifc^ the I^les, 1983 were sugerseded in feto l3y^ ffi 198S?i Thus,; we are of the' ppinion ,thaK,,tHe}Rules, 1983 would' be^apRliG^Ble 16 the extent the Rutes, l,9S^aEeiaIerif.;' : i j^^'^^^ ^ :^ ; -,^,'!9S-S".WS fsS^sxsii' 4a,t ^!uaaBB' ^K2iSts«Be'^^MES^^ti KB*--taUS!asaaii'aat!".,i {:).l [^:. :;ilOirBlil@^lIQ0tUSC)03J|^.8Ubl4IpBOj^^%;;^ f:ai;^C@1^U|^OQ|^tg..3I^^^3^^^S^^ aiq^i ji^^^'pg^d^'^^^^ iJaTO°^'®^ 31^,1^,-||^q;/aSBro3SBa3ip^'s^;<g6^ ,;3T^ |!4gj ;P^'% iU^jg .SQUBUS^UTmiI^lUa^^ •uiaio^ri^^iro^jo.i^ 'g^6Iis'^ay s^[m paagap u^q!Sm^ ^t^sj.'atpt.^ :3t^^i|.nB%'Hoi^.4;reuiidiosip^9^^ ,'10^ l^i^ ^;; oi p^s^ aajjBi^j^ ~^^GWBy^:^ uo&iiev\^j^;^^^ -et^sires UB^si^g '•aQ^^qsy: ^ap^J^ ^iQ^^M s'ei[ <fl33TtlM;' Sg&T 'ssin^ stRi'.isipjn.ji^-Jsip^spaiUiQdcie SJSA I'ON ^aapyodsMisio SuipnpHi.saa^idiHa'lgsQip SB \m<Ii%t'^^ ^pssssJpRB^666i-i,-TZ^3%pse/^/^6/Z—QT-a'ONm"^^ sip .^q qsspBJci ^^p^yi jQ.'u'tiaii.iu.isAO.Q ST-t^. ./eq:, pa^UB.ig iissq ^pes.tIB ,SBL[ uoT^BZuB'[n3sj ijoj soH^d^^ ^i[:i ^iio^tism^ag os^e S'BIl.3(J8UI3-I V •^OC(^t"9S'1:>3¥^%|HCT^S^SS!W?Niist^^^^^ vyyes, jq ?)SOd' sq^ ^sure^ g'BNi RI^S isiisp^^^ S^FraW@XsSTreS ^saiNi ^•GHW^up9^®®j® a^^a^ ^ BpirBi.re3(3iAiA 3tp a^ SuByo^Jsga^pS^ 91^^ XIQI:^^ j0 uoi^BJSpisyoo jo} ^OQE"QT:"%^B^TO3^pTO°aYtI®Pa3l3s3®4isi.p SAQI^ q3itiM'(^^dB ^UAt atpt^ig^^ /**-'"' .".-. -:.:': : '::;''' '•'••'•• ' '.-".':. •"••;'. '••:.-;'..^'-. •;" .'•:-;'-."... .-'... .' '. ' . sw^nsd^ 4sA 3% "-^^w ^<:i%^& A/[-PN'TI^^8S^ 3% ^ P^^STP ^^ sip j9pun wsureusAOQ s^g aifl;'^ pap^ avp. TUOJ} Areites paxg 3Lp jo UoT^B.oi.ttttaai si^ ^ S'm^sS s'BA^3i[ V3V^ syvlsvp 4pu p[nooj 3i{ ;n<i ss^pi^s^jBp^A B TOU; seav ^•pts[.luspiiodssj:: aip; ^w^ aQi^u3:pjoo aT^^sSrej ^tiBipdcte^^ufl^ .10} lasynoo p3U.iey[ •8 .4.<4 !>; l:;'f ,& i!,jli'j^ hljfj:! li:IJ'^ i:iil:!!^: I ^•MW^.—^f^iKpnB 9. 4, ].« s ..s ^ ,]E' in^n of an iristitutiQn.'or pf a new^subjeet^^ o sectioh in the, ^existing 'claSs 6y the Madhya R^esh Boai-d 6f Secondar^ Edueati0n; or arly University 6r may be, and showrt 011 tKe ^ay 'roll of the institution against a post as being in the. employmeafas^ such but does itot iiiclude a teacher whdse appointme^'isciisapgr6yed.u^erclause(c)o^secticffl The reSpQildent N0.1 is teeing ^paid fixim the pay roll of the institufion against the posf of Tabla Teacher irbin tKe maintenance graitt'fulid paid':by tHe State Government and ^h^ ^TSot^^'&Wn^ •Sisafypi'eweS.:. ^ pending e6nsi3eration Sir 10. . 'HoB^'bl®^^y^r^g ' Gourt:-:in^^<^ •'PfStlssvah. ' Sfaiiltla Vs.: AkfaUesh. , I&imarSUulda aadlot:Ue»S;;l9!86(I) SLR 699 held as uhder : "17. ^In .this case' the defieiencies in the.drafting;6f'the,, aiid'l^ nia^erisence^ori.^ witK fKeffi po sbmesclifEculty.ln^ a^ .There ^is no dispute'tHat ;1& 1947 ^ lirovisions regarding ,tKe,irecruitinent 6f candiaates to |!6he; posts m the^mmistenal'establisUnaent 'mithe SubQr^mst^JtS^ the fonmer United PrOYincses aiid they continueid ifo Xse liiiiforce till Ji^ tt;, ;t95Q.: On:;.'Jul^ :l,l:'l prpmzilgafed. TKey were.a^licable;nofe to ' estabUsl'inietits i .in' ^GHvit ' Gourts ^ btit 'ulB ji:tBe^3mim;istenal estabUs|unents in severaI^tHei'^ofEces.^They/we^^R^ in supersession 6f all existiii®rule&^^ They prescrihed'.that recrurtiaent to th|e , subordina.te pfBce to wKieh fKe said rales were apg^CabM shoyld be nia(ie|:dn the basis of:a;eornpetiti^ the moide ofsalculation|:(}fvaGaEtCies,ttee':penoS^l CQmpietitiye eX.am.inatioajs^slioxilS^he' ^heljd, the? sHlgeot;^^lor. flle tesf^and|fhe marks a^igHgd;to-e&ch:,Qfi/tbem^a^ seleeticmi of 'successftilyt^didate.: Th% appointments 'to higMter^postsTm .the, temisteny offices ^ouM tie-made^Iiy^oHicttiQn.iI^ I^Ies ancl.Appendix^p^toiifgwhieK ' Stc>bd superseded. TKe :E>tfieKpaMs;:6ffthe,,1947.Ruiles^<^ ;'with the^|riationality,^|lj^ic&^^ theu- acaxienue.qyalificsataoj^iGtoarai;^ appointing.;ayth@i^^'^>r^^ '• punishment^ Fa1s:of^93t^SN®^r^a^ of. servi@ei rGmau'iect.'injta.et^siiiee'jtl'ie;1950 ••Sules'?8id?aolti: iBaKe; any'prc^sion as rggards'il^se^topiES^^ ;lli! i' 12. Tbaltur with th& a.igument.ij^ 1947 Rulegi s^ed: superseded ^ the 1950 Rules. Rules |relyihg iiBon ttie ogenirig wQrds of. the 1950 Rules ••whiGirread:tliys:" :.;::::':': ::^ :'':', • ': '.: •' : "•:•.- "In exefGise of the powers CQillerred by Articte 309 of fhe CQnstitution,of Indis and m supersessiori^^b^^^^ and orders 6n fhe sufeject...." . , : '• 18. "Iri sypersession'QfaIl^stingFulesa^ ^bject" can^gnly :referifo^thQse^ ina which coifespond tp^e :niattei^'deak.wi^^^^ We have expt^ed easKerfthe other subjects^^i^ whieh were rifit cbvered by'tte 195Q Ryles^Hence the arguaient based on the assumption that t&e entire 1947, Rules.had heen repealed by miplication and no ^amendment £6uld be^.made ;to the 1947 Rules has to' :be rejected. ^The ?High Gourt' was, therefore, righftn oBser^g'thafffiewKoledfthe 1947^^^ npt eoine to ari end on the promulgafion ofthe 1950.;Rules.iThe problera, ^owever, does not get solved'/thereby as we shall piresently show." 'II. In view' of the above raenHoned fects and .circyinstances,^without iriterfering m the) impugned forder 'pa^^ the leamed Single Jydge, we disposed. oF^the instant writ appeal with the obseryation fhat the respondents may fbUow^ tKe Rules, 1985 as^ • upto date but if thcjse Rules are silertt on the conduct of the enquiiy or conduot ofthe disciplinaty proceedings etc., fhey shall fbllow tfae pTovisionsof.the Rules, 1983. . With the above observatioas this^wrif appeal is disposed;of./ Nd^ orderas to costs. \ . . Sdf- l.NI.Quddus' judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge 1 i 'U