ORDER Mathur, C.J. -- 1. This is a matter which has been remanded by their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court with the following directions : -- "Accordingly the appeals are allowed and the matters remitted to the High Court and the Administrative Tribunal-respectively. We, however, think it appropriate that the question in issue herein should be decided by the High Court. The respondents in other appeals before us (appeals preferred – by the State of Madhya Pradesh) shall be permitted to intervene in the said matters before the High Court. The hearing of the matter before the Administrative Tribunal pursuant to this order are stayed pending the decision of the High Court The High Court shall decide the question of entitlement of these employees to pension and gratuity in accordance with law. The High Court shall permit both parties to file such further material as they think appropriate in support of their respective cases, alongwith affidavits. The High Court may consider an early disposal of the matter. We also think it desirable that this matter is heard by a Division Bench of the High Court. After the High Court renders its decision, the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal shall dispose of the matters before it (matters now remanded to it) in accordance with the decision of the High Court. The appeal are disposed with the above directions. No costs." This matter was taken up in S.L.P. by the Hon. Supreme Court arising out of order passed by the Division Bench, Indore as well as various orders passed by the Administrative Tribunal. The question which arose in all these petitions was whether the employees working in Janpad Panchayats and Zila Panchayat are entitled to all benefits of service like Government employees including the benefits of bonus, gratuity, family pension, death-cum-retirement gratuity, etc. The Division Bench of this Court, Indore Bench in the case of Gopal Chandra Joshi v. State of M.P. and two others dated 22.2.1986 in M.P. No. 806 of 1995 took the view that the employees are not entitled to all service benefits as admissible to the employees of the State. In the similar matter which was pending at the Main Seat at Jabalpur, finding that there is conflict in the finding, question, whether the employees of Janpad Panchayat are entitled to all the benefits of service as admissible to the State employees, was referred to the larger Bench. In the similar matter which was pending at the Main Seat at Jabalpur, finding that there is conflict in the finding, question, whether the employees of Janpad Panchayat are entitled to all the benefits of service as admissible to the State employees, was referred to the larger Bench. Therefore, these cases were clubbed together for final disposal at the Main Seat at Jabalpur. 2. In the case of M.P. No. 1983 of 1988, Janapad Panchayat Karamchari Sangh filed a petition in the High Court and prayed for all those benefits of service which are admissible to the employees of the State of M.P. In order to appreciate the whole controversy, it may be relevant to mention here that the Panchayat Act for the first time came into being in 1962, known as M.P. Panchayats Act, 1962 (for short, hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1962). This Act of 1962 provided three-tier system i.e. Gram Panchayat, Janapad Panchayat and Zila Panchayat. Service conditions of employees working in these Panchayats are governed by S. 72 of the Act of 1962. Chapter VI of the Act of 1962 deals with Gram Panchayat Establishment Budget and Accounts. Section 72 of the Act of 1962 contemplated the appointment of Secretary. Section 72 reads as under: "72. Appointment of Secretary – (1) Every Gram Panchayat having an annual income exceeding five thousand rupees, shall have a Secretary who shall be a full-time salaried officer of the Gram Panchayat. (2) A Gram Panchayat not falling under sub-section (1) shall have a part-time or full-time Secretary who may be an honorary or salaried officer of the Gram Panchayat : Provided that two or more of such Gram Panchayats may have a common Secretary . Thus, section 72 contemplated that every Gram Panchayat shall have a secretary who shall be full time salaried officer. Section 73 of the Act of 1962 provided that every secretary of the Gram Panchayat shall be an ex-officio secretary of the Gram Sabha. Section 73 reads as under : "73. Ex-officio Secretary of Gram Sabha – The Secretary of the Gram Panchayat shall be an ex -officio Secretary of the Gram Sabha." Section 74 of the Act of 1962 provided for appointment of officers and servants of Gram Panchayat. Section 74 reads thus : "74. Section 73 reads as under : "73. Ex-officio Secretary of Gram Sabha – The Secretary of the Gram Panchayat shall be an ex -officio Secretary of the Gram Sabha." Section 74 of the Act of 1962 provided for appointment of officers and servants of Gram Panchayat. Section 74 reads thus : "74. Appointment of officers and servants of Gram Panchayat- (1) Subject to the provisions of section 72 a Gram Panchayat may, with the previous sanction of the prescribed authority, appoint such other officers and servants as may be necessary for carrying out its functions and discharging its duties under this Act efficiently. (2) The duties of the Secretary and other officers and servants of the Gram Panchayat, their qualifications, method of recruitment, salaries, leave allowances and other conditions of service including disciplinary matters shall be such as may be prescribed." According to this section 74 of the Act of 1962, subject to the provisions of section 72, a Gram Panchayat may, with the previous sanction of the prescribed authority, appoint such officers and servants as may be necessary for carrying out its functions and discharging its duties under this Act of 1962 efficiently. It also contemplated that the qualifications, method of recruitment, and other conditions of service including disciplinary matters shall be such as may be prescribed. Section 74-A of the Act of 1962 provided for deputation of Government servants to Gram Panchayat. Section 75 of the Act of 1962 deals with establishment of provident fund. Section 75 reads as under : "75. Establishment of Provident Fund – A Gram Panchayat may in accordance with rules made under this Act – (a) establish and maintain a Provident Fund on behalf of its officers and servants ; (b) grant gratuity to any officer or servant subject to the previous approval of the prescribed authority; and (c) grant pension to any officer or servant subject to the previous approval of the State Government." According to this section 75 of the Act of 1962, a Gram Panchayat should have a provident fund and grant gratuity to its officers and servants and also the pension subject to previous approval of the State Government. Similar provisions exist for Janapad Panchayat Establishment, Budget and Accounts in the Act of 1962 in Chapter XII. Section 144 lays down for appointment of Chief Executive Officer who shall be appointed by the State Government. Similar provisions exist for Janapad Panchayat Establishment, Budget and Accounts in the Act of 1962 in Chapter XII. Section 144 lays down for appointment of Chief Executive Officer who shall be appointed by the State Government. Section 145 deals with grant of leave of absence and conditions of service of Chief Executive officer. Section 146 deals with other officers and servants. Section 146 of the Act 1962 says that subject to the provisions of the Act of 1962 and the rules made thereunder, a Janapad Panchayat may employ such officers and servants as may be necessary for the efficient discharge of its duties. Section 147 deals with establishment of Provident Fund and section 148 lays down that Government officers can be brought on deputation to the service of the Janapad Panchayat. 3. The Act of 1962 was repealed by Act No. 35 of 1981 called the M.P. Panchayats Act, 1981 (for short the Act of 1981). The corresponding provisions appear in sections 62, 63 and 64, which read as under : "Sec. 62. Appointment of Secretary – (1) The State Government or the prescribed authority may appoint a Secretary for a Gram Panchayat or a group of two or more Gram Panchayats : Provided that the person holding the charge of a Secretary of Gram Panchayat immediately before the commencement of this Act shall continue to function as such till a Secretary is appointed in accordance with this section. (2) Every Janapad Panchayat shall have Chief Executive Officer who shall be appointed by the State Government. (3) Every Zila Panchayat shall have a Secretary who shall be appointed by the State Government. (4) During the absence of a Secretary of Gram Panchayat or Chief Executive Officer of Janapad Panchayat or Secretary of Zila Panchayat due to leave, retirement, death, resignation or otherwise, the prescribed authority shall, as soon as possible, make such arrangement as he deems fit for carrying on the office of Secretary of Gram Panchayat or Chief Executive Officer of Janapad Panchayat or Secretary of Zila Panchayat as the case may be. A person while carrying on such office shall exercise all powers conferred by this Act or rules made thereunder on the Secretary of Janapada Panchayat or Secretary of Zila Panchayat, as the case may be. "63. A person while carrying on such office shall exercise all powers conferred by this Act or rules made thereunder on the Secretary of Janapada Panchayat or Secretary of Zila Panchayat, as the case may be. "63. Other officers and servants – (1) Subject to the provisions of section 62, every Panchayat may with previous approval of prescribed authority appoint such other officers and servants as it considers necessary for the efficient discharge of its duties. (2) The qualifications, method of recruitment, salaries, leave, allowance and other conditions of service including disciplinary matters of such officers and servants shall be such as may be prescribed. "64. Deputation of Government Servants – The State Government may depute to the service of the Panchayat such of its servants as it considers necessary. The service conditions of such deputed servants shall be such as may be prescribed by the State Government from time to time." 4. The Act of 1981 was repealed by Act No. 13 of 1990, called the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1990 (for short the Act of 1990). In this Act of 1990 also, similar provisions exist in sections 67, 68 and 69, which read as under : "67. Appointment of Secretary and Chief Executive Officer- (1) The State Government or the prescribed authority may appoint a Secretary for a Gram Panchayat or group of two or more Gram Panchayats : Provided that the person holding the charge of a Secretary of Gram Panchayat immediately before the commencement of the Act shall continue to function as such till a Secretary is appointed in accordance with this section. (2) Every Janapad Panchayat shall have a Chief Executive Officer who shall be appointed by the State Government. (3) Every Zila Parishad shall have a Secretary who shall be appointed by the State Government. (4) During the absence of a Secretary of Gram Panchayat or Chief Executive Officer of Janapad Panchayat or Secretary of Zila Parishad due to leave, retirement, death, resignation or otherwise the prescribed authority shall, as soon as possible, make such arrangements as he deems fit for carrying on the office of Secretary of Gram Panchayat or Chief Executive Officer of Janapad Panchayat or Secretary of Zila Parishad, as the case may be. A person while carrying on such office shall exercise all powers conferred by this Act or rules made thereunder on the Secretary of Gram Panchayat or Chief Executive Officer of Janapad Panchayat or Secretary of Zila Parishad as the case may be. (5) The Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, the Chief Executive Officer of the Janapad Panchayat and the Secretary of the Zila Parishad shall be responsible for keeping and maintaining the records of the Gram Panchayat, Janapad Panchayat or Zila Parishad, as the case may be. "68. Other officers and servants of panchayat -- (1) Subject to the provisions of section 67, every Panchayat may with ,previous approval of prescribed authority appoint such other officers and servants as it considers necessary for the efficient discharge of its duties. (2) The qualifications, method of recruitment, salaries, leave, allowance and other conditions of service including disciplinary matters of such officer and servants shall be such as may be prescribed. "69. Deputation of Government Servants – The State Government may depute to the service of the Panchayat such of its servants as it considers necessary. The service conditions of such deputed servants shall be such as may be prescribed by the State Government from time to time." 5. The Act of 1990 was further amended by Act No.1 of 1994, called the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyain, 1993 (for short the Act of 1993) and there also, sections 69, 70 and 71 deal with the establishment, Budget and Accounts of Panchayat. 6. Under the aforesaid Acts, rules were framed way back in 1976, called Madhya Pradesh Janapad Panchayat Employees. (Qualifications, Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1976 (for short the Rules of 1976). We have been given to understand that these rules still survive and they have not been repealed. Rule 2 lays down the strength in the Janapad Panchayat Service. It says that the strength of Janapad Panchayat Service shall be determined by the State Government. Rule 4 lays down methods of recruitment. Rule 5 says about types of service, category of officials i.e. General, Technical in officers cadre and executive cadre, ministerial cadre and it also lays down the eligibility criteria. Rule 17 lays down that the pay scale and allowance shall be decided by the State Government from time to time. Rule 22 deals with age of superannuation. Rule 5 says about types of service, category of officials i.e. General, Technical in officers cadre and executive cadre, ministerial cadre and it also lays down the eligibility criteria. Rule 17 lays down that the pay scale and allowance shall be decided by the State Government from time to time. Rule 22 deals with age of superannuation. Rule 40 says that the employees will be entitled to provident fund as per the rules made under S. 147 of the Act, 1962. 7. As per the scheme of the Act, can these employees of Panchayats be treated to be the employees of the State M.P. or not? The employees who were appointed on various posts either in the Gram Panchayat, or Janapad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat are essentially appointed by Panchayat only except the Secretaries of Janapad Panchayat and Zila Panchayat who are appointed by State. Secretary is appointed by the State Government or by the prescribed authority. The State Government issued notification laying down the 'prescribed authority - for various Panchayats. It may also be relevant to mention here that the Act of 1993 has been enacted by the State of M.P. in pursuance of 73rd Amendment by which part IX was introduced in the Constitution and that provides constitution of Panchayats like, Gram Panchayats, Janapad Panchayats and Zila Parishads, etc. The idea behind introducing this new part IX by way of 73rd Amendment to the Constitution was to grant more autonomy in the governance of these Panchayats right from the grass roots. Hence, keeping in view this 73rd Amendment, M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyain, 1993 was enacted by the State. In this Act of 1993 also, sections 69, 70 and 71 provide appointment of staff for regulating- the business of the Panchayats. Not only under the Act of 1993 but right from 1962 when the Act of 1962 was enacted, it will appear that appointment of staff of the Panchayats was within the competence of the Panchayats, the only rider being that it should be with the due approval of the prescribed authority and not unlikely noticed at the level of the Gram Panchayat, Janapad Panchayat and Zila Panchayat of various officers like Tahsildar, S.D.O. or the Collector as the case may be. But at no point of time, the State Government had any direct involvement in the matter of the staff of Panchayats. But at no point of time, the State Government had any direct involvement in the matter of the staff of Panchayats. The staff was used to be managed by the Secretaries concerned of Gram Panchayat, Janapad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat. It is apparent that all these employees who are manning various posts in the Panchayats -- be it Gram Panchayat, Janapad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat, are recruited by the Panchayat only. Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, these persons can be treated to be the employees of the State. 8. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Janapad Panchayat and Jila Panchayat Karamchari Sangh Ratlam v. State of M.P. & Others [1992 (1) Vidhi Bhasvar 86 = 1992 MPLJ 804 ] after discussing the whole scheme of the Act took the view that these employees of Panchayats are not the employees of the State and they are the employees of the Panchayats only. It was held that the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Gujarat v. Ramanlal Soni and others ( AIR 1984 SC 161 ) is not applicable to the employees working in the State of Madhya Pradesh. In this connection, our attention was specifically invited to the decision of Hon 'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Gujarat v. Ramanlal Soni and others (supra). It may be relevant to mention here that this decision has already been distinguished by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Janapad Panchayat and Jila Panchayat Karamchar Sangh (supra). In the case of State of Gujarat (supra), facts are wholly distinguishable. It was observed by their Lordships of Supreme Court as under: "The attitude of the State of Gujarat in these cases has indeed left us puzzled and wondering. In the case of State of Gujarat (supra), facts are wholly distinguishable. It was observed by their Lordships of Supreme Court as under: "The attitude of the State of Gujarat in these cases has indeed left us puzzled and wondering. On one hand, there are lakhs of employees working under various Panchayat Institutions, call them Government servants or not, to whom the benefits of the recommendations of the two pay commissions, the Sarela and Desai Commissions, have been extended, while on the other hand, there is a microscopic number (comparatively) of category, also working under Panchayat Institutions, who are denied the benefits of those recommendations, on the sole ground of a birth-mark, if we may so call it, since they are denied the benefits because before they came to work under the Panchayat Institutions, they were employed in Municipalities while the others were Government servants to start with. The unfairness and the injustice of the distinction is patent, whatever legal justification may be put forward. Surely, the State- dedicated as it is to socialism, equality and economic justice and enjoined by the Directive Principles to secure the right to work, a living wage, equal pay for equal work and so on cannot make such a distinction. But the distinction has been made; it is sought to be sustained to examine whether there is any constitutional or other legal sustenance for the distinction. We did request the counsel for the State of Gujarat to communicate with his clients to find out if the benefits cannot gracefully be extended to the estwhile employees of Municipalities presently working under Panchayat Institutions also. We are told that the answer of the State of Gujarat is in the negative." From the facts that have emerged, it appears that large number of employees working in the Panchayats were Government servants and there were small number of servants who were subsequently inducted in the service of Panchayats from the Municipalities. They were employed in Municipalities and were Government servants to start with. Therefore, according to the facts of this case, large number of employees working in the Panchayats were initially appointed as Government servant and likewise some of the employees came as employees of the Panchayats who were working as Government servants and they were absorbed in the Panchayats. Fate of these persons who had their birth-mark of serving earlier in the Municipalities was to be decided. Fate of these persons who had their birth-mark of serving earlier in the Municipalities was to be decided. Hence, this case of Hon'ble Supreme Court be of any guidance for deciding the present case. 9. As per the scheme of the Act, the State Government was nowhere connected with the appointment of the employees of Panchayats. They were all initially appointed by the Panchayats and they continued to be the members of the Panchayats Service and hence they cannot be treated as Government servants so as to confer upon them the benefits of service as admissible to the employees of the State in this connection our attention was also invited to the decision of the Supreme Court given in the case of R.N.A. Britto v. Chief Executive Officer ( AIR 1995 SC 1636 ). In this case also, question was regarding the Panchayat Secretaries under the Karnataka Village Local Board Act. The question was whether these Panchayat Secretaries hold a civil post under the State within the meaning of S. 15 (I) (b) and whether they are entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for redressal of their grievances in relation to their service matters. Their Lordships after referring to the decision in the case of State of Gujarat (supra) and after examining the scheme observed – "....... When it comes to the Secretaries of the Panchayats appointed under the Act, that selection for appointment, their termination from service, their liability for transfer and all other conditions of their services are provided for under the Rules made under the Act or other rules made under Article 309 of the Constitution in respect of service 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 Rule made under the proviso of Art, 309 of the Constitution, the qualifications, powers, duties, remunerations 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 the 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. " Looking to the scheme of the Act -- Karnataka Village Local Boards Act, 1959, their Lordships inferred that the Secretaries will be treated as Government servants and accordingly they can approach the Tribunals for redressal of their grievances. 10. In the present case, as we have pointed out, the employees working in the Panchayats right from 1962 onwards have been the employees of the Panchayats and they cannot be treated as employees of State Government by any stretch of imagination. There are also some decisions which are brought to our notice wherein a conflicting approach has been adopted. This Court in the case of Janapad Panchayat and Jila panchayat Karamchari Sangh, Ratlam and others v. State of M.P. and others [1992(1) Vidhi Bhasvar 86 = 1992 MPLJ. 804] took the view that the employees of the Panchayats are not Government servants. A contrary view was taken by the Indore Bench in the case of Gopal Chandra Joshi v. State of M.P. and others (M.P. No. 806 of 1985) decided on 22.2.1986. There is another judgment of this Court in the case of Jagdamba Prasad Verma and another v. Janapad Panchayat Sehora and other (M.P. No. 2268/86) decided on 30.11.1989 in which this Court has taken the view that the employees of Janapad Panchayat are entitled to pension. Though this case is distinguishable on the facts as the employees was serving as an Accountant under the Janapad Sabhaand the Janapad Sabha passed a resolution to make New Pension Rules applicable to these employees and it was held that the employees of that Janapad Sabha are entitled to the pension and revision of pay scale from time to time. In another judgment in the case of Ramanlal Pandev v. Janapad Panchayat Panagar (1993 ST (1) 112), a view has been taken that the pension is payable to the employees of Janapad Sabha as is being paid to the employees of the State. 11. Our attention was also invited to the decision in the case of Sunderlal Dwivedi v. Janapad Panchayat, Hatta and others (M.P. No. 139/83) wherein their Lordships of the Division Bench of this Court directed to pay the benefits of various Pay Commissions i.e. Pandey Pay Commission, Choudhary Pay Commission as is paid by the State Government to its employees. 11. Our attention was also invited to the decision in the case of Sunderlal Dwivedi v. Janapad Panchayat, Hatta and others (M.P. No. 139/83) wherein their Lordships of the Division Bench of this Court directed to pay the benefits of various Pay Commissions i.e. Pandey Pay Commission, Choudhary Pay Commission as is paid by the State Government to its employees. Thus there has been fairly a great controversy in regard to the service conditions of the employees of the Panchayats. However, from the material which has been placed before us and the scheme of the Act of 1962 right from 1962 to 1993 and specially after 73rd Amendment in part IX to the Constitution introducing Arts. 243 to 243 K giving total autonomy to the Panchayats in their governance, the employees of the Panchayats have to be treated as employees of the Panchayats. Therefore; in view of 73rd Amendment in the Constitution, it cannot be said that the employees of Panchayats are the employees of the State Government. We are, therefore, of the view that all the employees working in the Panchayats cannot be said to be the employees of the State. They are the employees of the Panchayats and their service conditions are regulated by the Panchayats only. 12. Now, coming to the question regarding extending the benefits of pension and gratuity, etc. to the employees of the Panchayats, it may be stated that they are governed by the rules framed by the State under the Panchayats Act, 1993. The Panchayats Act has come into force on 25th Jan., 1994 but no rules have been brought to our notice governing payment of pension and gratuity etc. to the employees of the Panchayats What has been brought to our notice is the Rules of 1976 and no other rules have been brought to our notice despite our direction, with regard to payment of pension and gratuity etc., to the employees of the Panchayats. The Rules of 1976 do not provide payment of pension. The Rules of 1976 provide payment of gratuity only. If any amendment has been made in these Rules, we do not know. If the Rules of 1976 hold good, then in that case the service conditions of the incumbents shall be governed by these Rules of 1976. 13. Accordingly, we hold that the employees of the Panchayats are not the employees of the State. If any amendment has been made in these Rules, we do not know. If the Rules of 1976 hold good, then in that case the service conditions of the incumbents shall be governed by these Rules of 1976. 13. Accordingly, we hold that the employees of the Panchayats are not the employees of the State. So far as their post-retiral benefits are connected, the same will be governed by the Rules of 1976, as amended. Accordingly all these petitions are disposed of.