Holding

The merger of the District Engineers cadre with the Executive Engineers cadre by executive order is valid and does not prejudice the promotion rights of Assistant Engineers.

Summary

The Supreme Court examined whether the Bihar State Government could, by executive order, merge the cadre of District Engineers (part of the Rural Engineering Organisation, created by a 1965 executive order) with the cadre of Executive Engineers governed by the statutory Bihar Engineering Service Rules, 1939. The appellants, Assistant Engineers in Class II, argued that the merger would diminish their promotion prospects and that statutory cadres could not be altered by executive fiat, invoking Rule 4 of the 1939 Rules and the 1885 Local Self‑Government Act. The Court held that the merger did not prejudice the Assistant Engineers; it actually enlarged the Executive Engineers cadre, creating more promotion vacancies. It further observed that the District Engineers’ cadre, having been created by executive order, could be merged by another executive order, and that Rule 4(i) and (ii) of the 1939 Rules were irrelevant to a group transfer. Consequently, the merger was upheld as a valid policy decision supplemental to the Rules. The appeals were dismissed.

Issues considered

Can an executive order merge a cadre created by a prior executive order with a cadre governed by statutory service rules?
Does the merger adversely affect the promotion rights of Assistant Engineers under Rule 4 of the Bihar Engineering Service Rules, 1939?
Do Rule 4(i) and 4(ii) of the 1939 Rules prohibit such a merger?
Is the statutory nature of the Executive Engineers cadre infringed by the merger?

Legislation cited

Bihar and Orissa Local Self Government Act, 1885s. 36(a) to 36(t)
Bihar Engineering Service Rules, 1939s. Rule 4
Bihar Service Code, 1952s. Rule 56

Subjects

cadre mergerexecutive orderpromotion rightsstatutory service rulesBihar Engineering Service RulesRural Engineering Organisationadministrative lawpublic service

Judgment

VINAY KUMAR VERMA AND OTHERS
A v.
THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS
•
APRIL 6, 1990 y-
B [KULDIP SINGH AND V. RAMASWAMI, JJ.]

Bihar Engineering Service Rules, 1939: Rule 4---Cadre of District
Engineers created by executive order-Merger of with statutory cadre of
Executive Engineers-Validity of.

c
Rule 4 of the Bibar Engineering Service Rules, 1939 provided for
recruitment to the cadre of Executive Engineers in the Bihar Public -
"'...
Works Department by (i) direct recruitment, and (ii) promotion from
Class II Service. The State Government by a memorandum dated
February 18, 1977 merged with the cadre of Executive Engineers of the
Public Works Department, the cadre of District Engineers functioning
D under the Rural Engineering Organisation. The latter cadre was con- _,..( -
stituted by the State in 1965 by integration of the Rural Engineering
Cell of the Public Works Department and the cadre of District
Engineers created by the erstwhile District Boards nnder the Govern-
ment District Engineers Service Rules, 1957 framed under ss. 36(a) to
36(t) of the Bihar and Orissa Local Self Government Act, 1885.
E
The appellants-Assistant Engineers assailed the said merger
before the High Court on the ground that it adversely affected their __..(
chances of promotion, that the District Engineers' Service was
constituted under the 1957 Rules framed under the 1885 Act whereas
the cadre of Executive Engineers in the Public Works Department was
F created by the 1939 Rules, and, as such the two cadres having been
created under their respective statutory rules the same could not be
merged by an executive order, and that since under rule 4(i) and 4(ii) of '
the 1939 Rules recruitment to the .cadre of Exelllltive Engineers could
only be by direct recruitment and by way of pro.\iotion, the merger of
District Engineers' cadre with the Executive Engineers was contrary to
..1(
-
G the 1939 Rules. The High Court negatived their contentions.

Dismissing the appeal, the Court,

HELD: 1. The appellants, who were Assistant Engineers in the
Bihar Engineering Service, Class II were not affected adversely by the ',.,
H merger in any manner. The District Engineers were merged in the

374
V.K. VERMA v. STATE OF B!HAR & ORS. 375

cadre of the Executive Engineers along with the permanent posts which A
they were holding on the date of merger. The cadre of the Executive
Engineers was thus enlarged with the result that more vacancies would
become available in future to be filled by way of promotion from the
cadre of Assistant Engineers. The merger would thus operate to their
advantage rather than disadvantage. [378E-F]
B
2. The provincialised cadre of District Engineers under the Dis-
trict Boards was constituted by the 1957 Rules but in the year 1977 when
merger took place the Distrcit Engineers constituted an entirely diffe.
rent cadre which was created in the year 1965 as a part of Rural En-
gineering Organisation. It did not have any statutory frame-wflrk.
Since the cadre of District Engineers under the Rural Engineering c
Organisation was created by the State Government by an executive
order the State Government could further merge the same with any
other cadre by an executive fiat. The Executive Engineers were gover-
ned by the 1939 Rules which are statutory. Their statutory character
has not been interfered with. The District Engineers were being merged
with Executive Engineers and not the vice versa. [378H, 379B,379DI D

3. Rule 4(i) and 4(ii) of the 1939 Rules do not come into picture at
all. It was not a question of appointment of.an individual to the Service.
A group of persons similarly situated in respect of rank and pay scale
·.)....___
was sought to be brought into the Service along with their posts. The
State Government could always increase the number of posts in the E
cadre of Executive Engineers. The conditions of service of the existing
members of Service are not being altered or affected to their prejudice in
any manner. [379E-F]

4. The merger order being a policy decision is in a way supple-
mental to the Rules and does not go contrary to any of the provisions of F
the Rules. [379F-G]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos.
4008-09 of 1985.
G
·From the Judgment and Order dated 26.9.1983 of the Patna High
Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1634 of 1977.

WITH

C.M.P. Nos. 5513-14and J9577-78of 1988. H
376 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 11990] 2 S.C.R.

Shanti Bhushan and P .D. Sharma for the Appellants. .
A .
Tapesh Chandra Ray, D.P Mukherjee, R.P. Singh and S.N. Jha
for the Respondents.

M.P. Jha for the Intervener. ·
B
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

KULDIP SINGH, J. The question for our consideration in these
appeals is whether by an executive order the Bihar State Government
can merge the cadre of District Engineers which is a part of "Rural
Engineering Organisation" with the cadre of Executive Engineers
c governed by statutory rules called the Bihar Engineering Service
Rules, 1939 (hereinafter called the 1939 Rules).

Necessary facts to dei~rmine the above question are as under:-

D The cadre of District Engineets was created by the erstwhile
District Boards in the State of Bihar. The recruitment and conditions
of service of the said cadre were governed by the Government District
Engineers Service Rules, 1957 (hereinafter called the 1957 Rules)
which were framed under the Bihar and Orissa Local Self Government
·Act, 1885 (hereinafter called the Act). Apart from the District
E Engineers, a Rural Engineering Cell of the Public Works Department .-A
was also functioning in°the rural areas. Bihar Government by an order
dated February 9, 1965, integrated the two into one organisation cal-
led "Rural· Engineering Organisation" (hereinafter called REO).

The REO was an entirely new department headed by a Chief
F Engineer with the powers of Inspector of Local Works under the Act.
Two posts of Superintendent Engineers, 19 posts of District Engineers
and number of other subordinate posts were created under the. Chief
Engineer. In the new set-up the cadre of District Engineers created
under the 1957 Rules became almost extinct and assumed a new shape
under the REO.
G
On the other hand, the cadre of Executive !ingineers in Bihar
Public Works Department was govemerl by the 1939 Rules. Rule 4
thereof is as under:

"4. Sources of recruitment-Recruitment to the
H service shall be made-
V.K. VERMA v. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. [SINGH, J.J 377

(i) by direct recruitment, and
.
(ii) by promotion from the Bihar Engineering Service,
A

Class II ..... "

The Bihar Government by a Memorandum dated February 18,
1977, decided to merge the cadre of District Engineers belonging to B
the REO with the cadre of Executive Engineers of the Public Works
Department. The operative part of the order is as under:

"Therefore, in the public interest, the Government has
decided that the cadre of the District Engineers be merged
with the equivalent/parallel cadre of Executive Engineers
of Public Works Department." c.

Vinay Kumar Verma and others, who were working as Assistant
- ......,____ Engineers in the Bihat Engineering Service, Class II, challenged the
above-mentioned merger-order before the Patna High Court on the
following grounds: D

(i) Under the 1939 Rules Assistant Engineers are eligible for
promotion to the posts of Executive Engineers. By merging the
cadres, the chances of promotion of the Assistant Engineers are
likely to be adversely affected and as such merger order is
. arbitrary and is liable to be quashed. E
(ii) That the District Engineers' service was co.nstituted under
the 1957 Rules framed by the State Government in exercise of the
powers under Sections 36(a) to 36(f) of .the Act. The cadre of
• Executive Engineers in the Public Works Department was
created by the 1939 Rules. The two cadres having been created F
under their respective statutory rules, the same cannot be
)!__ merged by an executive order. The composiiion of cadres
created by the statutory rules cannot be changed by an executive
order. ..

(iii) Under Rule 4(i) and 4(ii) of the 1939 Rules, recruitment to G
the cadre of Executive Engineers can only be by direct recruit-
ment and by way of promotion. The merger of the District
Engineers cadre with the Executive Engineers is thus contrary to
the 1939 Rul~s and as such cannot be sustaine.d.

The High Court found that the chances of promotion of ihe H
378 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1990] 2 S.C.R.

Assistant Engineers were in no way adversely affected by the merger
A
as the District Engineers came to the cadre of Executive Engineers •
along with their posts. The High Court further held that the Assistant
Engineers who were in the lower cadre could not challenge the merger
specially when the same did not a~fect their rights in any manner.

B
On the other two points the High Court relied on Rule 56 of the
Bihar Service Code, 1952 which is in the following terms:

"56(a) The State Government may transfer a Government
servant from one post to another ..... "

c The High Court held that the Government has the power under
the above quoted rule to transfer a Government servant from one
cadre to another. According to High Court even though the merger is
not explicitly under rule 56(a) but since the power is there the District
Engineers be deemed to have been transferred to the Public Works
Department in terms of the said Rule. The High Court dismissed the
D writ petitions of the Assistant Engineers. This is how these two appeals
by way of special leave are before us.

Mr. Shanti Bhushan, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the
appellants has reiterated the above mentioned three points in his argu-
E ments before us.

We agree with the High Court that the appellants, who were
Assistant Engineers in Bihar Engineering Service, Class II, were not
affected adversely by the impugned order in any manner. The District
Engineers were merged in the cadre of the Executive Engineers along
F with the permanent posts which they were holding on the date of
, • • lfiet-ger. The cadre of the Executive Engineers was thus enlarged with
the result that more vacancies would become available in future to be
filled by way of promotion from the cadre of Assistant Engineers. The
merger would thus operate to their advantage rather than dis-
advantage.
G

The second point as projected by Mr. Shanti Bhushan does not
arise in the facts and circumstances of the present case. It is no doubt
correct that initially the cadre of the District Engineers was constituted
by the 1957 Rules which were framed under the 1885 Act, but by the
H time the impugned order was issued in the year 197?, it was operating
V.K. VERMA v. STAIB OF BIHAR & ORS. (SINGH, J.) 379

as an entirely different cadre created in the year 1965 as a part of A
. REO. The REO, which was new department, consisted of a Chief
Engineer, two Superintending Engineers, 19 posts of District
Engineers, number of Assistant Engineers and Overseers. The District
Engineers were no longer a provincialised cadre under the District
Baords as created by the 1957 Rules but was a new cadre operating
under the REO. We are, therefore, of the view that the cadre of B
District Engineers under the REO was created by the State Govern-
ment by an executive order and as such the State Government could
further merge the same with any other cadre by an executive fiat.

The third limb of the argument based on Rule 4(i) and 4(ii) of the
1939 Rules may now be examined. It is not disputed that the District c
Engineers were equivalent in rank to the Executive Engineers. The
pay-scales were also identical. The two equivalent and parallel cadres
were operating in two different fields. To achieve administrative effi-
ciency the State Government wanted to merge these cadres. The
Executive Engineers were governed by the 1939 Rules which are D
statutory, whereas the District Engineers created by Government
order dated February 9, 1965 did not have any statutory frame-work.
The statutory cadre of Executive Engineers has not been interfered
with. It is operating under the 1939 Rules. The District Engineers are
being merged with Executive Engineers and not the vice versa. Rule
4(i) and 4(ii) of the 1939 Rules do not come into picture at all. It is not a E
question of appointment of an individual to the service. A group of
persons similarly situated is sought to be brought into the service. The
State Government can always increase the number of posts in the
cadre of Executive Engineers. What is being done by the impugned

• order is that the incumbents of the posts are also being brought into
the cadre along with the posts. The conditions of service of the existing
members of service are not being altered or affected to their prejudice
p

in any manner. In fact none of the Executive Engineers has challenged
•
the impugned order. After merger the District Engineers would also
be governed by the 1939 Rules. The impugned order being a policy
decision is in a way supplemental to the Rules and does not go contrary
to any of the provisions of the Rules. G

We therefore see no force in the arguments of Shri Shanti
Bhushan.

The view which we havP, taken to uphold the impugned order, we H
380 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1990) 2 S.C.R.

do not wish to express any opinion on the applicability and interpreta-
A
tion of Rule 56 of the Bihar Service Code, 1952 on which the High
Court has relied.

The appeals fail and are dismissed with no order as to costs. The
Civil J\:liscellaneous Petition Nos. 5513-14 of 1988 and 19577-78 of 1988
B are also dismissed as having become infructuous.

P.S.S. Appeals dismissed.

•