1. Recruitment for Enrolled Followers under statutory rules — Process cancelled midway via executive instructions to implement a new recruitment policy — Challenge to the validity of cancellation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 )
Back
Next 
2025 Supreme(SC) 1273
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.K. MAHESHWARI, RAJESH BINDAL, JJ.
Partha Das & Ors. – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Tripura & Ors. – Respondent
Civil Appeal Nos.4426-4466 of 2023
With
Sujan Roy & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State Of Tripura & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 4473-4479 of 2023
Decided on : 28-08-2025
Important Points
Executive instructions cannot supplant statutory rules. A recruitment process governed by statutory rules cannot be cancelled midway by an executive policy, as changing the 'rules of the game' after commencement is arbitrary and violates the candidates' legitimate expectation of a fair and predictable selection process.
Subject
Administrative Law - Public Employment
Act Referred
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA: Art.14, Art.16, Art.166(1), Art.166(2), Art.166(3), Art.309
TRIPURA STATE RIFLES ACT: S.22
TRIPURA STATE RIFLES RECRUITMENT RULES: R.14, R.20(2), R.31, R.8
TRIPURA STATE RIFLES ACT: S.22
TRIPURA STATE RIFLES RECRUITMENT RULES: R.14, R.20(2), R.31, R.8
Headnote
(A) Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983 - Sections 3, 4, 5, 9, 22 - Tripura State Rifles (Recruitment) Rules, 1984 - Cancellation of recruitment process - Court held that the State Government's executive decisions cannot override statutory provisions, particularly when a recruitment process has reached an advanced stage and is governed by the established rules. The Abeyance and Cancellation Memorandums issued by the State lacked statutory backing and aimed to change the rules post-commencement of the recruitment process. (Paras 1 to 51)
(B) Legal Principles - Principles of legitimate expectation - Candidates hoped for appointments after participation in recruitment process and were unjustly deprived by arbitrary state action without due justification. The recruitment process must be conducted fairly and in a non-arbitrary manner as per statutory guidelines. (Paras 53 to 60)
Facts of the case:
The recruitment for posts of Enrolled Followers in the Tripura State Rifles was at an advanced stage when the State issued a memorandum to cancel ongoing recruitment processes due to a new policy decision. The appellants participated in the selection process, with some receiving tokens for character verification.
Findings of Court:
Court found the cancellation of the recruitment process to be arbitrary and unlawful, ordering the recruitment process to be finalized within two months according to the statutory provisions.
Issues: 1) Whether the State’s cancellation of the ongoing recruitment process is justified under law? 2) Whether legitimate expectation principles apply to candidates who participated in the selection process? 3) Can executive decisions alter a recruitment process governed by statutory rules post-commencement?
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that executive instructions cannot override statutory rules, and cancelling recruitment midway without completion or justification infringes on candidates' legitimate expectations. The court emphasized the need for transparency and fairness in governmental processes.
Result: Appeals allowed; the previous judgments of the High Court were set aside.
(B) Legal Principles - Principles of legitimate expectation - Candidates hoped for appointments after participation in recruitment process and were unjustly deprived by arbitrary state action without due justification. The recruitment process must be conducted fairly and in a non-arbitrary manner as per statutory guidelines. (Paras 53 to 60)
Facts of the case:
The recruitment for posts of Enrolled Followers in the Tripura State Rifles was at an advanced stage when the State issued a memorandum to cancel ongoing recruitment processes due to a new policy decision. The appellants participated in the selection process, with some receiving tokens for character verification.
Findings of Court:
Court found the cancellation of the recruitment process to be arbitrary and unlawful, ordering the recruitment process to be finalized within two months according to the statutory provisions.
Issues: 1) Whether the State’s cancellation of the ongoing recruitment process is justified under law? 2) Whether legitimate expectation principles apply to candidates who participated in the selection process? 3) Can executive decisions alter a recruitment process governed by statutory rules post-commencement?
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that executive instructions cannot override statutory rules, and cancelling recruitment midway without completion or justification infringes on candidates' legitimate expectations. The court emphasized the need for transparency and fairness in governmental processes.
Result: Appeals allowed; the previous judgments of the High Court were set aside.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- administrative law
- constitutional law
Table of Contents
2. Appellants claim executive instructions cannot override statutory rules or change selection criteria mid-process — State contends cancellation was a bona fide policy decision in larger public interest. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 )
3. Executive instructions cannot supplant statutory rules — Changing recruitment benchmarks after the process has commenced is arbitrary — State failed to demonstrate overriding public interest for cancellation. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 )
4. Executive instructions can supplement but not supplant statutory rules — Recruitment criteria cannot be altered after the process has commenced — Legitimate expectation requires non-arbitrary state action. (Para 34 , 37 , 40 , 49 , 52 , 57 , 58 )
5. Appeals allowed — Abeyance and Cancellation Memorandums quashed — Recruitment process to be finalized per statutory rules within two months. (Para 61 )
6. Can executive instructions override or amend statutory recruitment rules?
No. Executive instructions can only supplement statutory rules by filling gaps or clarifying ambiguities; they cannot supplant or override specific provisions of a statute or rules already occupying the field. (Para 34 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 )
7. Can the recruiting authority change selection benchmarks or criteria after the recruitment process has commenced?
No. While authorities can devise procedures in the absence of rules, benchmarks must be stipulated before the process begins. Changing the rules after the game has begun is arbitrary and violates Article 14. (Para 49 , 50 , 52 )
8. Do candidates in a public recruitment process have a legitimate expectation of appointment?
Candidates do not have an indefeasible right to appointment merely by being on a select list, but they have a legitimate expectation that the process will be conducted fairly, consistently, and non-arbitrarily. (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 )
9. Can a recruitment process be cancelled midway solely on the grounds of larger public interest?
Yes, but the burden is on the State to objectively demonstrate with relevant material that the decision was rooted in bona fide public interest and not arbitrary. (Para 42 , 43 , 45 , 46 , 57 )
JUDGMENT :
J.K. Maheshwari J.
Questioning the validity of the judgment dated 03.10.2019 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Tripura commonly passed in a batch of writ petitions, two set of Civil Appeal Nos. 4426-4466 of 2023 and 4473-4479 of 2023 have been filed. The issue involved in these appeals relates to cancellation of the ongoing recruitment process of ‘Enrolled Followers’ midway on the pretext of a policy decision of the State Government.
2. The subject matter in dispute is appointment on the post of Enrolled Followers in Tripura State Rifles Battalions. In the State of Tripura, the recruitment of Enrolled Followers is governed by the Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as “TSR Act”) read with the Tripura State Rifles (Recruitment) Rules, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as “TSR Rules”). For the sake of convenience, some pertinent provisions of the TSR Act, which govern the recruitment of Enrolled Followers, are referred.
2.1 Section 3(s) defines ‘the Rifles’ as Tripura State Rifles. Section 3(g) defines ‘Enrolled Followers’ as any person appointed to do the work of a cook, masalchi, water-carrier, mess-servant, ward-boy, washerman, cobbler, barber, sweeper, helper or cleaner. Section 4 specifies that the State Government shall constitute a force called Tripura State Rifles and Section 5 grants power to the Commandant to appoint Enrolled Followers. As per Section 9, the State Government is vested with the power of superintendence and control over Tripura State Rifles, and that its administration shall be done by the State Government as per the provisions of TSR Act and the rules made thereunder through Director General of Police, Inspector General or such Deputy Inspector General or other officers as the State Government may so appoint. Section 22 confers power on the State Government to make rules to carry out the purpose of the TSR Act. Thus, the TSR Act is a complete code in itself which provides for constitution of and recruitment in Tripura State Rifles and confers power on the State Government to frame rules.
3. In furtherance of the power under Section 22 of TSR Act, State Government enacted TSR Rules, wherein Rule 3 talks about powers of State Government and certain officers, i.e., Inspector General, the Deputy Inspector-General and Commandant of Tripura State Rifles. Further, it confers powers on Inspector General, the Deputy Inspector-General and Commandant to supervise and control Tripura State Rifles. Rule 6 categorises Tripura State Rifles into ranks wherein Enrolled Followers are defined at serial no. xii as non-gazetted, class-IV. Rule 8 prescribes the method of appointment of the members of the Rifles and the appointing authority. The said rule is relevant, therefore, reproduced hereunder:
“8. Method of appointment of the members of the Rifies:
(1) The members of the Rifles shall be appointed by one or more of the following methods-
(a) Direct recruitment;
(b) Promotion;
(c) Re-employment of ex-services or ex-Central Police Organization personnel; and
(d) Deputation or transfer of the personnel of Armed Forces of the Union or Central Police Organization or Police Organization of any State.
(2) 75% of direct recruitment in all ranks shall be make from within Tripura and the remaining 25% of such direct recruitment shall be made from states and Union Territories outside Tripura.
(3) The appointing authorities for members of the Rifles shall be as follows:
| Sl. No. | Rank | Authority competent |
| (i) | Subedar | Inspector-General |
| (ii) | Naib Subedar | Commandant |
| (iii) | Havildar | Commandant |
| (iv) | Naik | Commandant |
| (v) | Lance Naik | Commandant |
| (vi) | Riflemen | Commandant |
| (vii) | Enrolled Followers | Commandant |
4. The present matter relates to recruitment to the post of Enrolled Followers, for which Rule 24 is also relevant, the same is reproduced hereunder:
“24. Recruitment Rules for the Posts
