Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vikas Baburao Patil Shirgaonkar, was appointed as District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor at Satara on 6th August 2014 for a term of three years. Subsequently, the State of Maharashtra issued a notification on 3rd February 2015/13th February 2015 amending the Maharashtra Law Officers (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Remuneration) (First Amendment) Rules, 2014, reducing the term of such officers from three years to one year. The Collector, Satara, issued a notice on 19th March 2015 calling upon the petitioner to hand over charge upon completion of one year. The petitioner challenged both the amendment and the notice. The court considered whether the amendment was valid and whether the petitioner had a vested right to continue for the full three-year term. The court held that the petitioner had no vested right to continue for the full term, as the appointment was subject to the rules in force. The amendment was validly made under Article 309 of the Constitution, and Article 311 did not apply as the post was not a civil post. The court also held that the amendment did not violate Article 14 as it applied uniformly. The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to hand over charge as per the notice.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Government Pleader - Term of Office - Vested Right - The petitioner, holding the post of District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor, challenged the amendment reducing the term from three years to one year. The court held that the petitioner has no vested right to continue for the full term and the amendment is valid. (Paras 2-5) B) Constitutional Law - Article 309 - Power to Amend Rules - The State Government has the power to amend the rules governing the conditions of service of law officers under Article 309 of the Constitution. The amendment reducing the term is within the legislative competence. (Paras 3-4) C) Constitutional Law - Article 311 - Not Applicable - Article 311 of the Constitution does not apply to the petitioner as the post of Government Pleader is not a civil post under the State. The petitioner is not entitled to the protection of Article 311. (Para 4) D) Constitutional Law - Article 14 - Reasonable Classification - The amendment does not violate Article 14 as it applies uniformly to all District Government Pleaders and Public Prosecutors. The classification is reasonable and based on administrative convenience. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the amendment to the Maharashtra Law Officers (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Remuneration) Rules, 2014 reducing the term of District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor from three years to one year is valid and whether the petitioner has a vested right to continue for the full term.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the petition, holding that the amendment is valid and the petitioner has no vested right to continue for the full term. The petitioner was directed to hand over charge as per the notice.
Law Points
- Vested right
- Term of office
- Government Pleader
- Public Prosecutor
- Article 309
- Article 311
- Article 14
- Maharashtra Law Officers (Appointment
- Conditions of Service and Remuneration) (First Amendment) Rules
- 2014
