Back
UDAY UMESH LALIT, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, S. RAVINDRA BHAT
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.
1.1 These appeals arise out of the decision of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowing the writ petition and directing the State to consider the case of the writ petitioners, Respondents no. 1 to 3 herein, for promotion under Rules that existed when the vacancies arose and not as per the subsequently amended rules. These directions were based on the decision of this Court in the case of Y.V. Rangaiah vs. J. Sreenivasa Rao, (1983) 3 SCC 284. As we noticed a number of decisions of this Court that have followed Rangaiah, and far more decisions that have distinguished it, we had to examine the issue afresh. The question is whether appointments to the public posts that fell vacant prior to the amendment of the Rules would be governed by the old Rules or the new Rules. After examining the principle in the context of the constitutional position of services under the State, and having reviewed the decisions that have followed or distinguished Rangaiah in that perspective, we have formulated the legal principles that should govern services under the State. Applying the said principles, we have held that the broad proposition formulated in Rangaia
(1) Appointment – Policy decision taken by Government in public interest would prevail over any claim to fill up vacancies.(2) Appointment – There is no rule of universal application that vacancies m....
Promotions for part-time casual labourers to Group D posts can be claimed under the 25% quota if vacancies exist in neighboring divisions, as clarified by the Tribunal's interpretation of the term 'n....
Recruitment - plea raised by the petitioners is fallacious - As mere acquiring of qualification at a relevant point of time cannot give rise to an expectation, much less, legitimate expectation of ap....
Lt. Governor competent to frame recruitment rules for UT subordinate services under Article 309 proviso; cadre restructuring/abolition of posts is executive policy not amenable to judicial review abs....
There is no vested right to promotion to selection posts. Vacancies are not required to be filled under repealed rules; instead, candidates are entitled to consideration only under the rules in force....
A candidate has a right to be considered in light of existing rules, which implies “rule in force” as on date consideration takes place.
when a new post is created, the concept of Rules obtaining when the vacancies arose is inappiicable as what is created is a new post on account of re-structuring of the cadre.
The court affirmed the validity of the merger of Senior Supply Inspectors with Area Rationing Officers effective from 30.06.2011, ruling that executive orders cannot override statutory rules.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
