SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 607

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sujata V Manohar, V N Khare
N. K. DURGA DEVI, APPELLANT
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS, RESPONDENTS.
Civil Appeal No. 112 of 1994 with SLP (C) No. 13324 of 1987, decided on April 2, 1997.

Headnote:

Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules – Rule 47 - Giving a notional seniority - Suit for promotion - Dispute in present appeal has arisen as a result of Government Order issued by Government of Andhra Pradesh in exercise of its power of relaxation under Rule 47 of State and Subordinate Services Rules, giving a notional seniority to Respondent 3 in appeal, in cadre of Superintendents instead of his actual date of promotion - Appellant who was promoted as Superintendent had been considered as senior in cadre of Superintendents prior to this change of date - She was promoted as Deputy Commercial Tax Officer - But in view of this order she has became junior - By a consequential order appellant was reverted as a Superintendent - Appellant challenged order by filing a petition which was ultimately heard by Administrative Tribunal - Present appeal is from this judgment and order – Held, In view of decisions of this Court in Govt. of A. P v. D. Janardhana Rao and Amrik Singh v. Union of India, it is conceded by learned counsel for Respondent 3 that order of relaxation could not have been validly passed without giving notice to all affected parties since that would be in violation of principles of natural justice - Position in law is quite clear - A relaxation order which affects rights of third parties, if passed in violation of principles of natural justice and without giving a hearing to affected parties would be void, or in any event, unenforceable in law - Impugned Government Order is set aside - It will, however, be open to authorities concerned to pass an appropriate relaxation order if they consider it necessary in accordance with law - Appeal is allowed and decision of Administrative Tribunal is set aside - In view of order passed in the appeal, no orders are necessary in special leave petition - Same is disposed of accordingly.

ORDER

1. The dispute in the present appeal has arisen as a result of Government Order No. 569 issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on 22-5-1986 in exercise of its power of relaxation under Rule 47 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules, giving a notional seniority to Veda Prakash, Respondent 3 in the appeal, in the cadre of Superintendents from 18-9-1981 instead of his actual date of promotion which was 17-5-1983. The appellant who was promoted as Superintendent on 2-5-1983 had been considered as senior to Veda Prakash in the cadre of Superintendents prior to this change of date. She was promoted as Deputy Commercial Tax Officer. But in view of this order she has became junior to Veda Prakash. By a consequential order dated 2-7-1987 the appellant was reverted as a Superintendent. The appellant challenged the order of 2-7-1987 by filing a petition which was ultimately heard by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal, by its impugned judgment and order has dismissed the petition of the appellant. The present appeal is from this judgment and order.

2. It is an accepted position that before GO No. 569 was issued, neither notice nor hearing was given to the appellant who is directly affected by GO No. 569.

3. In view of the decisions of this Court in Govt. of A. P v. D. Janardhana Rao [(1976) 4 SCC 226 : 1976 SCC (L&S) 586 : (1977) 1 SCR 702], R. R. Verma v. Union of India [(1980) 3 SCC 402 : 1980 SCC (L&S) 423 : (1980) 3 SCR 478] and Amrik Singh v. Union of Jndia [(1980) 3 SCC 393 : 1980 SCC (L&S) 415 : (1980) 3 SCR 485], it is conceded by the learned counsel for Respondent 3 that the order of relaxation could not have been validly passed without giving notice to all affected parties since that would be in violation of the principles of natural justice. The position in law is quite clear. A relaxation order which affects rights of third parties, if passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and without giving a hearing to the affected parties would be void, or in any event, unenforceable in law. The impugned Government Order No. 569 dated 22-5-1986 is, therefore, set aside.

4. It will, however, be open to the authorities concerned to pass an appropriate relaxation order if they consider it necessary in accordance with law.

5. The appeal is allowed and the decision of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal is set aside. In the circumstances of the case, however, there will be no order as to costs.

6. In view of the order passed above in the appeal, no orders are necessary in the special leave petition. The same is disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top