Case: C.Muniyappa Naidu Etc Vs. State Of Karnataka And Ors

This group of appeals raises a common question of law affecting Senior Health Inspectors on deputation with the Municipal Corporation of the City of Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation). The facts giving rise to the appeals are identical and may be briefly stated asappellants are Senior Health Inspectors in the Karnataka State Civil Service. It seems that prior to 3rd March, 1971, when the City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation Services (General) Cadre and Recruitment Regulations, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Cadre and Recruitment Regulations) came into force, the practice of the Corporation was to have one half of the cadre of Senior Health inspectors manned by deputation of Senior Health Inspectors from the Karnataka State Civil Service and in accordance with this practice, the appellants were taken on deputation by the Corporation from the Karnataka State Civil Service. While the appellants were working as Senior Health Inspectors on deputation, the Corporation passed a resolution dated 30th December, 1974- approving the report of the Commissioner that sixteen Senior Health Inspectors, including the appellants, who were working under the Corporation on deputation should "be absorbed in the interest of work if they are:willing on then own pay and accept their seniority as Juniors to the Senior Health Inspectors of the Corporation." It is the case of the appellants that on the same day, immediately:after the passing of this Resolution, they addressed a communication to the Mayor of the Corporation intimating to him that they were willing to be absorbed as Senior Health Inspectors under the Corp oration on their own pay and with ranking below the Senior Health Inspectors of the Corporation. The factum of this communication was disputed by the Corporation as well as by the State Government, but in the view we are taking, it will not be necessary for us to examine this question. To. continue further with the narration of facts, the Corporation sent the Resolution dated 30th December, 1974 to the State Government for according its sanction and the State Government by an order dated 6th May, 1975 accorded sanction "to the Corporations resolution dated 30th December, 1974 regarding the absorption of the Senior Health Inspectors" mentioned the Resolution under section 89 of the City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The term of the Corporation in the meantime came to an end and since fresh elections were not held to elect the members of the Corporation, an administrator was appointed by the Government to manage the affairs of the Corporation. The administrator requested the State Government to defer implementation of the proposal contained in the Resolution dated 30th December, 1974 since the permanent officials of the Corporation were considerably disturbed by this proposal as it prejudicially affected their chances of promotion by reason of the absorption of sixteen deputationist Senior Health Inspectors from the Karnataka State Civil Service. The State Government on the basis of the communication addressed by the Administrator in this behalf passed another order dated 25th August, 1976 with- drawing the sanction accorded under the earlier order dated 6th May, 1975. The appellants being prejudicially affected by the withdrawal of the sanction. preferred writ petitions in the High Court of Karnataka contending that as soon as the State Government gave its sanction on 6th May, 1975 to the Resolution of the Corporation dated 30th December, 1974, they were absorbed as permanent employees of the Corporation and they ceased to be Government servants and the State Government thereafter had no authority to withdraw the sanction granted by it under the earlier order dated 6th May, 1975 and the subsequent order dated 25th August 1975 was invalid and inoperative. These writ petitions came up for hearing before a Single Judge of the High Court who rejected them by a judgment dated 22nd September, 1975. The appellants thereupon preferred appeals under section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act. 1961, but the appeals were unsuccessful and they were rejected by a Division Bench of the High Court by a judgment dated 28th May, 1976. Hence the present appeals by the appellants with special leave obtained from this Court.

Court's reasoning:
The Cadre and Recruitment Regulations thus recognised only two modes of recruitment to the post of Senior Health Inspector, namely, promotion from the cadre of Junior Health Inspectors and deputation from the State Directorate of Health Services and one half of the cadre was to be drawn from each of these two sources. No other mode of recruitment could be resorted to by the Corporation under the Cadre and Recruitment Regulations. it is difficult to see how in the face of this provision which has admittedly statutory effect, the posts of Senior Health inspector could be filled in by absorption of deputationist Senior Health Inspectors from the Karnataka State Civil Service. Senior Health Inspectors from the State Directorate of Health Services could only be on deputation to t he extent of one half of the number of posts of Senior Health Inspectors on the Corporation establishment and they could not be absorbed as permanent Senior Health Inspectors under the Corporation without violating the aforesaid statutory provision. This statutory provision does not contemplate any Senior Health Inspectors on the establishment of the Corporation who are drawn from the State Directorate of Health Services otherwise than on deputation and to absorb Senior Health Inspectors from the State Directorate of Health Services as permanent employees of the Corporation (otherwise than on deputation), would be plainly contrary to its express mandate. It was, however, contended on behalf of the appellants that when they were absorbed as permanent Senior Health Inspectors on the establishment of the Corporation, they were already in the cadre of Senior Health Inspectors under the Corporation, filling 50% of the posts and their absorption as permanent Senior Health Inspectors did not constitute fresh entry into the cadre so as to require compliance with the Cadre and Recruitment Regulations. The position, according to the appellants, was similar to that of an employee Who is initially Officiating in a post in a cadre and is subsequently confirmed in the post. This contention, we do not think, is well founded. It is only by way of deputation that Senior Health Inspectors from the State Directorate of Health Services can find place in the Cadre of Senior Health Inspectors on the establishment of the Corporation. Not only their entry but also their continuance in the cadre of Senior Health Inspectors on the Corporation establishment depends on their being on deputation. There is no scope under the Cadre and Recruitment Regulations for their absorption as permanent Senior Health Inspectors under the Corporation. In fact, it is impermissible to do so. The category of Senior Health Inspectors, who are regular employees of the Corporation, can be drawn only by promotion from Junior Health Inspectors and that too, to the extent of only one half the number of posts. It is, therefore, obvious that without amendment of the Cadre and Recruitment Regulations permit- ting appointment--and absorption is really nothing but appointment--of Senior Health Inspectors drawn from the State Directorate of Health Services as perm anent Senior Health Inspectors under the Corporation, the appellants could not be absorbed as permanent Senior Health Inspectors on the Corporation establishment. The conclusion must irresistibly follow that the Resolution of the Corporation dated 30th December, 1974 read with the Government order dated 6th May, 1975 did not operate to put an end to the status of the appellants as Government servants and to create the relationship of master and servant between the Corporation and the appellants and in the circumstances, it was competent to the State Government to pass the Order dated 25th August, 1975 withdrawing the sanction grante d by it under the earlier Order dated 6th May, 1975. This view taken by us renders it unnecessary to consider whether the communication dated 30th December, 1974 was addressed by the appellants to the Mayor of the Corp oration expressing their willingness to be absorbed as Senior Health Inspectors under the Corporation on the terms set out in the Resolution dated 30th December, 1974. Even if any such communication was sent, it could have no legal effect because, as already pointed out by us. the appellants could not be absorbed as permanent Senior Health Inspectors under the Corporation, unless and until the Cadre and Recruitment Regulations were first amended so as to permit such absorption.