Holding

A Panchayat Secretary appointed under the Karnataka Village and Local Boards Act is a State Government servant and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain his service‑related grievance.

Summary

R.N.A. Britto, appointed as Secretary of the Bajpe Panchayat under the Karnataka Village and Local Boards Act, 1959, was terminated by a memo dated 4 November 1986. He challenged the termination before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed his petition on the ground that he was not a civil servant of the State within the meaning of clause (b) of Section 15(1) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined whether a Panchayat Secretary is a State Government servant. Relying on the provisions of the 1959 Act, the related recruitment rules, and the constitutional test for a civil post, the Court held that Panchayat secretaries are indeed State Government servants and therefore fall within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The Tribunal’s rejection was deemed a patent error. The appeal was allowed, the Tribunal’s order set aside, and the matter remitted to the Tribunal for a merits review, with no costs awarded.

Issues considered

Whether a Secretary of a Panchayat appointed under the Karnataka Village and Local Boards Act, 1959 qualifies as a State Government servant within the meaning of clause (b) of sub‑section (1) of Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, thereby conferring jurisdiction on the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal to entertain a termination petition.

Legislation cited

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985s. 15(1)(b)

Subjects

Administrative lawTribunal jurisdictionState servantPanchayat secretaryTermination of serviceKarnatakaAdministrative Tribunals ActCivil service

Judgment

A SRI R.N.A. BRITIO
v.
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND 9RS.

MAY 1, 1995

B [KULDIP SINGH AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.]

Kamataka Panchayats (Secretaries) (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules,
1970. I

Administrative Law-Administrative Tribunals Act 1985--Section
c 15(1)(b).

Kamataka Village and Local Boards Act, 1959-Sections 80(2), 210(!).

Jurisdiction of Administrative Tribunal to entertain a petition relating
to tennination of a person working in a Panchayat as secretary-Whether he
D is a State Government servant-Held : He is a person appointed to a civil
post and is a civil servant of the State-Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain
petition challenging his tennination.

The services of the Appellant who was working as secretary of the
Bajpe Panchayat which was established under the Kamataka Village and
E Local Boards Act, 1959 was terminated by a 'memo' dated November 4,
1986. He challenged the termination before the Kamataka Administrative
Tribunal. The Tribunal did not admit the petition on the ground that it did
not have jurisdiction to entertain the petition since the petitioner was not
in the civil service of the State or in a civil post under the State within the
F meaning of clause (b) ofsub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act.
Review application was also rejected on the same grounds.

While it was contended before this court by the Appellant that a
secretary of a Pancbayat established under the Act and dealing witJt the
affairs of the local authority was a government servant and the Tribunal
G bad to entertain bis petition challenging bis termination, this was contested
by the State.

Allowing the Appeal and remanding the matter, this court

HELD : 1.The Tribunal fell into a patent error in rejecting the review
H application of the Appellant filed before it on the ground that it had no
932
R.N.A BRITTO v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 933

jurisdiction to deal with the matter. Panchayat secretaries under the Kar- A
nataka Village and Local Boards Act, 1959 (Act) are State Government
servants. If that be so, they are persons who are appointed in the civil
service of the State or civil post under the State within the meaning of
clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act, as would
enable them to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for redressal of their B
redressal of their grievances in relation to any service matter concerning
them. [942-B, 941-H, 942-A)

' , 2. The provisions in the Act, clearly show that several functions which
were required to be performed by the State are entrusted to the Panchayats.
They also show that the properties yested in the Panchayats and the funds C
of the Panchayat are that of the Government and those collected by way of
tax or fee by exercising the power of taxation vested in the Panchayat by the
Government. Above all, the provisions in the Act make it abundantly clear
that the Panchaya ts have to function under the ultimate control of the State
Government. When it comes to the secretaries of the Panchayats appointed
under the Act, their selection for appointment, their termination from D
service, their liability for transfer and all other conditions of their services
are as provided for under the rules made under the Act or other rules made
under Article 309 of the Constitution in respect of services of the State
Government servants. When sub-section (2) of Section 80 of the Act states
that subject to the provisions oHhe rules made under the proviso of Article E
309 of the Constitution, the qualifications, powers, duties, remuneration
and conditions of service including disciplinary matters of such secretary
shall be such as may be prescribed, it leaves no room for doubt that the
secretaries of Panchayats are Government servants, like other Government
servants, who are subjected to the rules to be made under the proviso to
Article 309 of the Constitution as regards their service conditions. F
[941-C to GI
State of Assam and Ors. v. Shri Kanak Chandra Dutta, [1967) 1 SCR
679 and State of Gujarat and Another v. Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni and
Others, [1983) 2 sec 330, followed.
G

... ! CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 718 of
1993.

From the Order dated 22nd January, 1992 of the Karnataka Ad-
ministrative Tribunal at Bangalore in Review Application No. 199 of 1990. H
934 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995) 3 S.C.R.

A S.N. Bhat for the Appellant.

M. Veerappa for the Respondent.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

B VENKATACHALA, J. R.N.A. Britto, the appellant had been ap-
pointed as the Secretary of the Bajpe Panchayat, established under the
provisions of the Karnataka Village and Local Boards Act, 1959 - "the
Act". The Chief Executive Officer of Mangalore Taluk Development
Board, Respondent-1 issued a 'Memo' dated November 4, 1986 to the '
appellant stating therein that his service as Secretary of the Bajpe
C Panchayat, had stood terminated. The appellant challenged the said ter-
mination of his service as Secretary of the Bajpe Panchayat, by an applica-
tion made before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal - "the Tribunal",
established under the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985
- "the Tribunals Act". But, by its Order dated September 20, 1988 the
D Tribunal rejected the application on the ground that it had no jurisdiction
to decide upon the matter. However, the appellant made an application
before the Tribunal seeking review of its earlier order. That review applica-
tion of the appellant was also rejected by the Tribunal by its order dated
January 22, 1992, reiterating its earlier view that it had no jurisdiction to
E decide on the matter of termination of the appellanfs service as Secretary
of a Panchayat, in that, he was not in the civil service of the State or in a
civil post under the State which would have given it the jurisdiction to
decide upon the matter under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 15
of the Tribunals Act. It is the said order of the Tribunal which has been
impugned by the appellant in this appeal by special leave.
F
The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant
being a Secretary of a Panchayat established under the Act serving in
connection with the affairs of the local authority was a State Government
servant and hence the Tribunal had juriSdiction under clause (b) of sub-
section (i) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act to decide upon the matter
G relating to termination of his service as Secretary of the Panchayat. On the
contrary, it was contended for the State and other respondents, that the
appellant who was the Secretary of a Panchayat established under the Act
was not a State Government servant and hence the Tribunal was justified
in rejecting the appellant's application on its view that it had no jurisdiction
H to decide upon the matter of termination of his service as Secretary of
RN.A BRIITOv. CHIEFEXECUTIVEOFFICER[VENKATACHAI.A,J.] 935

Bajpe Panchayat established under the Act. A
If regard is had to the above rival contentions urged in this appeal,
the short question which nee~ our consideration in deciding the appeal
would be the· following :

a
Is a Secretary of a Panchayat established under the Act, State B
Government servant entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the
Tnbunal to decide upon the matter of termination of his service
under clause (b) of sub-section {1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals
. , Act?

All matters of a person appointed to any civil service of a State or C
any post under the State pertaining to his service in connection with t~e
affairs of the State or of any local or other authority under the control of
the State Government or of any corporation or society owned or controlled
by the State Government are matters with respect to which the Tribunal
could exercise its jurisdiction under clause (b) of sub-section {1) of D
Section 15 of the Tribunals Act, is not in dispute. The appellant was a
Secretary of a Panchayat established under the Act and as such Secretary
•
was serving in connection with the affairs of that Panchayat, a loci!
authority under the control of the State Government, is also not in dispute.
For, such a Secretary to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under clause E
(b) of sub-section {1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act for redressal of
his grievance pertaining to his service in connection with the affairs of a
Panchayat under the control of the State Government, must have been in
the civil service of the State ~ in a civil post under the State, is against not
in dispute. Therefore, the short question which r.equires our consideration
is whether the appellant who was the Secretary of Bajpe Panchayat wa5 a F
person appointed in civil service of the State or in the civil post under the
State, as would enable him to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under ·
clause (b) of sub-section {1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act, for
redressal of his grievance respecting termination of his service ·as such
Secretary.
G
The view of the Tribunal, as becomes clear from. its Order under
appeal, is that there existed no relationship of master and servant between
the State Government and the appellant even though he had been ap-
pointed as Secretary of the Bajpe Panchayat established under the Act and
hence, the appellant cannot be regarded as a person appointed in the civil H
936 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] 3 S.C.R.

A service of the State or in a civil post under the State, as would entitle him
to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal under clause (b) of sub-section
(1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act for redressal of his grievance in the
matter of termination of his service as Secretary of the Panchayat. It is true
that a person cannot claim to be a State Government servant if he is not
B in the civil service of the State or in a civil post under the State envisaged
in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act. There-
fore, for accepting the appellant's claim that he was a State Government
servant, being the Secretary of Bajpe Panchayat, we must be able to hold
that every person becoming a Secretary of a Panchayat established under
the Act has to be regarded as a State Govt. servant, i.e., a person in the
C service of the State or in the civil post under the State envisaged in
sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act.

A member (person) in the civil service of the State or in the civil post
under the State means a Government servant of the State, is the well-set-
D tied position in law ever since it was ruled by a Constitution Bench of this
Court in State of Assam & Ors. v. Shri Kanak Chandra Dutta, (1967] 1 SCR
679, that a member in civil service of the State or in civil post under the
State envisaged in Article 311 of our Constitution, was a Government
servant. Indeed, there, the Constitution Bench in reaching the conclusion
that Mauzadar of Assam Valley was in the civil service of the State or in
E the civil post under the State and hence was a Government servant, has
adverted to the criteria or factors, which could form the basis for finding
that there existed the relationship of master and servant between the
Government and the person concerned, so as to make the latter a Govern-
ment servant, thus :

F
The question is whether a Mauzadar is a person holding a civil
post under the State within Art. 311 of the Constitution. There is
no formal definition of "pose' and "civil post". The sense in which
they are used in the Services Chapter of Part XIV of the Constitu-
tion is indicated by their context and setting. A civil post is
G distinguished in Art. 310 from a post connected with defence; it is
a post on the civil as distinguished from the defence side of the
administration, an employment in a civil capacity under the Union
or a State. See marginal note to Art. 311. In Art. 311, a member
of a civil service of the Union or an all India service or a civil
H service of a State is mentioned separately, and a civil post means
R.N.A. BRITTO v. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER [VENKATACHALA, J.J 937

a post not connected with defence outside the regular civil services. A
A post is a service or employment. A person holding a post under
a State is a person serving or employed under the State. See the
marginal notes to Arts. 309, 310 and 311. The heading and the
sub· heading of Part XIV and Chapter I emphasises the element
of service. There is a relationship of master and servant between B
the State and a person holding a post under it. The existence of
this relationship is indicated by the State's right to select and
appoint the holder of the post, its right to suspend and dismiss
him, its right to control the manner and method of his doing the
work and the payment by it of his wages or remuneration. A
relationship of master and servant may be established by the C
presence of all or some of these indicia, in conjunction with other
circumstances and it is a question of fact in each case whether
there is such a relation between the State and the alleged holder
of a post.

. In the context of Arts. 309, 310 and 311, a post denotes an
D
office. A person who holds a civil post under a State holds "office"
during the pleasure of the Governor of the State, except as ex-
pressly provided by the Constitution. See Art. 310. A post under
the State is an office or a position to which duties in connection
with the affairs of the State are attached, an office or a position E
to which a person is appointed and which may exist apart from
and independently of the holder of the post. Article 310(2) con-
templates that a post .may be abolished and a person holding a
post may be required to vacate the post, and it emphasises the idea
of a post existing apart from the holder of the post. A post may F
be created before the appointment or simultaneously with it A
post is an employment, but every employment is not a post. A
casual labourer is not the holder of a post. A post under the State
means a post under the administrative control of the State. The
State may create or abolish the post and may regulate the c<indi-
tions of service of persons appointed to the post. G

Judged in this light, a Mauzadar in the Assam Valley is the
holder of a civil post under the State. The State has the power and
the right to select and appoint a Mauzadar and the power to
suspend and dismiss him. He is a subordinate public servant H
938 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] 3 S.C.R.

A working under the supervision and control of the Dep!'ty Commis-
sioner. He receives by way of remuneration a commission on his
collections and sometimes a salary. There is a relationship of
master and servant between the State and him. He holds an office
on the revenue side of the administration to which specific and
onerous duties in connection with the affairs of the State are
3 attached, an office which falls vacant on the death or removal of
the incumbent and which is filled up by successive appointments.
He is a responsible officer exercising delegated powers of Govern-
ment. Mauiadars in the Assam Valley are appointed Revenue
Officers an ex-officio Assistant Settlement Officers. Originally, A
c Mauzadar may have been a revenue farmer and an independent
contractor. But having regard to the existing system of his recruit-
ment, employment and functions, he is a servant and a holder of
a civil post under the State.'

D State of Gujarat and Another v. Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni and
Others, [1983] 2 SCC 330, is another Constitution Bench decision of this
Court which requires mention. There, the question for consideration was
whether members of Gujarat Panchayat Service under the Gujarat
Panchayats Act, 1961 were Government servants. In the context of examin-
ing that question, it has been stated thus :
E
"We do not propose and indeed it is neither politic nor possible
to lay down any definite test to determine. when a person may be
said to hold a civil post under the Government. Several factors
may indicate the relationship of master and servant. None may be
F conclusive. On the other hand, no single factor may be considered
absolutely essential. The presence of all or some of the factors,
such as, the right to select for appointment, the right to appoint-
ment, the right to terminate the employment, the right to take other
disciplinary action, the right to prescribe the conditions of service,
the nature of the duties performed by the employee, the right to
G control the employee's manner and method of the work, the right
to issue directions and the right to determine and the source from
which wages or salary are paid and a host of such circumstances,
may have to be considered to determine the existence of the
relationship of master and servant. In each case, it is a question
H of a fact whether a person is a servant of the State or not."
R.N.A.BRITIOv. CHIEFEXECUI1VEOFFICER[VENKATACHALA,J.] 939

The above excerpts reproduced from the judgments of two Constitu- A
tion Benches of this Court since furnish the relevant criteria or factors
which should form the basis for deciding the question as to when a person
in the service of the State .or in the civil post under the State, could be
regarded a servant of the State (a Government servant) as envisaged in
Article 311 of the Constitution, we shall regard that criteria or factors, as B
ought to be done, to be a proper basis to determine whether the appellant
appointed as Secretary of a Panchayat is a person in service of the State
or in civil post under the State envisaged under clause (b) of sub-section
(1) of Section 15 of the Tribunals Act, a Government se'rvant (servant of
Karnataka State) and proceed accordingly.
c
As the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, which
could supply the relevant criteria or factors needed in determination of the
question whether a Secretary of a Panchayat under the Act could be held
as Government servant, it would be necessary to advert to them.

Panchayats are established under Section 5 of the Act. Panchayats D
so established are, subject to control of Government under a duty, so far
as Panchayat funds at their disposal allow, to make reasonable provision
within the village in regard to various matters referred to therein, such as,
construction, repair and maintenance of village roads, ponds, drains bunds,
maintenance of public buildings, grazing lands and forest lands vesting in
or under the control of the Panchayat and .functions as may be entrusted E
to the Panchayats by the Govenµnent from time to time, such duty having
been imposed by Section 42 of the Act. The property of the Taluk Board
vested in the Panchayat becomes .the property of the Panchayat and every
work constructed by a Panchayat out of the Panchayat .fund shall ·vest in
the Panchayat as declared under Section 69 of the Act. Coming to the F
Panchayat fund, among others, the following form P.art of such fund :

(a) the amount which may be allotted to the Panchayat fund by the
Government under the provisions of the Act or any other Act;

'(b) the proceeds of any tax imposed by the Panchayat; G
( c) sums contributed to the Panchayat fund by the Government or
a Taluk Board;

( d) the income or proceeds of any property vesting in the Panchayat
etc. II
940 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995]3 S.C.R.

A The Commissioner shall subject to the control and orders of the
Government, be the chief controlling authority in respect of all matters
relating to the administration of the Act, as envisaged by Section 196 of
the Act.

B What we have stated, being the general scheme of the Act as to the
establishment of Panchayat, properties, the administrative control of the
Government over the Panchayat, sub-section (1) of Section 80 of the Act
requires that every Panchayat shall have a Secretary who shill be appointed
by the Commissioner in accordance with such rules as may be prescribed.
Karnataka Pancha}'.ats (Secretaries) (Cadre and Recruitment) Rules, 1970
C - "the Rules' are those Rules prescribed by sub-section (1) of Section 210
of the Act. Rule 2 of the Rules states that the Panchayat Secretaries Cadre
shall be districtwise cadre and the scale of pay of the Panchayat Secretaries
shill be such as the Government may, from time to time, by order, specify.
Sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the Rules provides for selection for appointment
D as Panchayat Secretaries by a committee consisting of the Deputy Commis-
sioner of the District, the District Development Assistant to the Deputy
Commissioner, the District Social Welfare Officer, and the Assistant Com-
missioner of the Revenue Sub-division concerned. Sub-rule (2) thereof
states that the Deputy Commissioner shill be the Chairman of the Com-
mittee .. Sub-rule (3) thereof provides for calling for applications from
E persons eligi'ble under Rule 4 for appointment as Panchayat Secretaries
and the Committee sltall select persons found suitable for appointment and
prepare a list of selected candidates and forward it to the Commissioner.
Sub-rule (4) provides that the Commissioner shill, if he approves the list,
publish it in the official Gazette and make appointment from the list so
F published in the <irder in which the names of persons selected are ar-
ranged. Rule 6 provides that every person appointed under Rule 5 as
Panchayat Secretary shill be on probation for a period of two years and
during the period of probation he should pass such tests and should
successfully undergo such training envisaged thereunder. Rule 8 says that
a person appointed under these Rules to any Panchayat shall be liable to
G be transferred to any other Panchayat in the district. Then comes Rule 9
which says cxccpr'm respect o( matters for which provision is made in these
Rules, the provisions of the Karnataka State Civil Services (General
Recruitment) Rules, 1957 shill be applicable for purposes of these Rules.
Again Rule 10 says that the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, the Karnataka
H Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966 and other rules for the time being in
\

"
RN.A. BRITIOv. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER[VENKATACf!ALA,J.] 941

force regulating the conditions of service of Government servants made A
under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution in so far as they are
not inconsistent with the provisions of these Rules shall be applicable to
persons to who these Rules shall apply.

Another significant provision is sub-section (2) of Section 80 of the
Act which says that subject to the provisions of Rules made under the
B
--:
proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, the qualifications, powers, duties,
remuneration and conditions of service including disciplinary matters of
., ,. such Secretary shall be such as may be prescribed .

The provisions in the Act to which we have adverted, clearly show c
that several functions which were required to be performed by the State
.are entrusted to the Panchayats. They also show that the properties vested
in the Panchayats and the funds of the Panchayat are that of the Govern-
ment and those collected by way of tax or fee by exercising the power of
taxation vested in the Panchayat by the Government. Above all, provisions D
of the Act make it abundantly clear that the Panchayats have to function
" under the illtimate control of the State Government. When it comes to the
Secretaries of the Panchayats appointed under the Act, their selection for
~
appointment, their termination from service, their liability for transfer and
all other conditions of their services are as provided for under the Rules
E
made under the Act or other rules made under Article 309 of the Con-
.stitution in respect of services of the State Government servants. When sub-
section (2) of Section 80 of the Act to which we have adverted states that
subject to the provisions of Rules made under the proviso of Article 309
of the Constitution, the qualifications, powers, duties, remuneration and
conditions of service including disciplinary matters ·of such Secretary shall F
be such as may be prescribed, it. leaves no room for doubt that the
Secretaries ·of the Panchayats are Government servants, like other Govern-
ment servants, who are subjected to the Rules to be made under the
proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution as regards their service condi-
tions. G

-- I Thus, the provisions of the Act and the Rules, to which we have
adverted to, leaves no option for us except to hold that Panchayat
Secretaries under the Act are the State Government servants. If that be so,
they are persons who are appointed in the civil service of the State or civil H
942 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] 3 S.C.R.

A post under the State within the meaning of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of
Section 15 of the Tribunals Act, as would enable them to invoke the f
jurisdiction of the Tribunal for redressal of their grievances in relation to
any service matter concerning them. Hence, the Tribunal, we hold, fell into
a patent error in rejecting the review application of the appellant filed
B before it on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter
relating to the termination of his service as the Panchayat Secretary.

In the result, we allow this Civil Appeal, set aside the Order of the
Tribunal under appeal, remit the case to the Karnataka Administrative
Tribunal, for deciding the review application of the appellant on merits and
C in accordance with law. No costs.

!.M.A. Appeal allowed.

' -