Whether executive orders can supplant statutory rules?

Shri. Bhatti, learned counsel for the petitioner assails this order on three counts. Firstly, it is submitted that the impugned order entails civil consequences and such adverse order could not have been passed without following principles of natural justice. Secondly, as per the circular of E-in-C dated 16.8.2012 (Annexure R-3) also, the recovery should have been made from the officer posted in establishment section of the department. Lastly, he submits that M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 are statutory in nature. With the rules, a statutory schedule is appended which makes it clear that for Class-III employees, the Office Head has full powers to grant the earned leave. The Executive Engineer, being the Office Head has granted earned leave to the petitioner, a Class-III employee. Thus, by way of issuing executive instruction, the power given under the rules cannot be supplanted.

 In the considered opinion of this court, petition deserves to succeed on point No. 3 putforth by Shri. M.S. Bhatti. This is trite law that by issuing executive instructions, statutory rules cannot be supplanted although same can be supplemented. Putting it differently, if the statutory rules recognize and approve that the Executive Engineer is the competent authority for grant of earned leave, the said power cannot be taken away by issuing the executive instructions. Since, earned leave in the present case is granted by the competent authority as per the schedule of the said rules, on executive fiat, the said power or benefit cannot be taken away. Resultantly, the impugned order dated 03.08.2016 cannot sustain judicial scrutiny.

  In the High Court of Madhya Pradesh

(Before Sujoy Paul, J.)

Piyush Verma v. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Print Page

Whether leave granted to govt servant by competent authority can be cancelled due to non observance of executive instruction?

 In the considered opinion of this court, petition deserves to succeed on point No. 3 putforth by Shri. M.S. Bhatti. This is trite law that by issuing executive instructions, statutory rules cannot be supplanted although same can be supplemented. Putting it differently, if the statutory rules recognize and approve that the Executive Engineer is the competent authority for grant of earned leave, the said power cannot be taken away by issuing the executive instructions. Since, earned leave in the present case is granted by the competent authority as per the schedule of the said rules, on executive fiat, the said power or benefit cannot be taken away. Resultantly, the impugned order dated 03.08.2016 cannot sustain judicial scrutiny.

       In the High Court of Madhya Pradesh

(Before Sujoy Paul, J.)

Piyush Verma v. The State of Madhya Pradesh

WP-15531-2016

Decided on February 27, 2018

Citation:2018 SCC OnLine MP 116

Print Page

Sanctioning leave is choice of administrative authorities: Madras HC

MADURAI: The Madurai bench of the Madras high court has ruled that sanctioning or rejecting leave, whether sick or some other leave, was the choice of the administrative authorities, and courts could not interfere in such matters. 

Dismissing a petition filed by an employee of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC), who claimed that he had not been given extension of leave though he had leave in his credit, justice S Vaidyanathan said the court could not sit over the decision of the administrative authority in such matters. It was for the management to decide on such issues based on administrative contingencies, the judge said. 

It was for the petitioner to convince the authority concerned while applying leave on health ground or at the time of joining duty. 

Print Page