Policy Decision - The Legal Chamber

Supreme Court Rules: Govt Can’t Cancel Ongoing Job Recruitments Midway

1Oct

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules: Govt Can’t Cancel Ongoing Job Recruitments Midway

This Supreme Court judgment reiterates that executive instructions, such as a New Recruitment Policy, cannot override or supplant statutory rules or rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. A recruitment process, once commenced under specific statutory rules, cannot be altered midway by executive fiat, as doing so amounts to changing the rules of the game after it has begun and violates principles of fairness and legitimate expectation. Facts Of The Case: The State of Tripura initiated a recruitment process for the post of Enrolled Followers in the Tripura State Rifles, conducted strictly under the Tripura State Rifles Act, 1983 and its corresponding Rules. The process, involving advertisements, physical tests, written exams, and interviews, had advanced significantly, with pr...

Supreme Court’s Balancing Act in Telangana Job Case :Legitimate Expectation vs. Employer’s Right

25Sep

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court’s Balancing Act in Telangana Job Case :Legitimate Expectation vs. Employer’s Right

This Supreme Court judgment reaffirms that candidates in a select list possess no vested right to appointment. An employer's decision to cancel a recruitment process is valid if based on bona fide reasons like administrative changes (e.g., state bifurcation) and altered requirements. The Court's role is limited to examining the decision-making process, not substituting its own view on the sufficiency of accommodations like age relaxation offered to affected candidates. Facts Of The Case: The erstwhile Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh (AP-Transco) initiated a recruitment process in 2011-2012 for 339 Sub-Engineer posts across the composite state. This process was delayed due to litigation challenging the marks weightage given to in-service candidates. While the legal challe...

Sand Mining Case: Supreme Court Explains State’s Power to Fix DMF Charges for Minor Minerals

12Jun

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Sand Mining Case: Supreme Court Explains State’s Power to Fix DMF Charges for Minor Minerals

The Supreme Court dismissed appeals challenging demand notices for depositing 10% of the total bid amount with the District Mineral Foundation (DMF). The Court held that Section 9B of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, is inapplicable to minor minerals due to Section 14. The State Government is empowered under Section 15A to fix the amount payable to the DMF for minor minerals. The Court found the demand consistent with statutory provisions and the 2017 Rules Facts Of The Case: Chandra Bhan Singh, a successful bidder for mining minor minerals (sand), was allotted a tender. In line with the Policy decision dated April 22, 2017, the Appellant was required to deposit an amount of ₹54,12,960/-, representing 10% of the total bid amount of ₹5,41,29,600/-, to the Dis...

10Jun

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

No Arrears for RBI Pension Opt-Ins: Supreme Court Reinforces Policy Decisions on Pension Benefits

The Supreme Court of India upheld the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) decision to fix a cut-off date (July 1, 2020) for pensionary benefits for employees switching from the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) scheme, rejecting the claim for retrospective arrears from the date of retirement. The Court emphasized that financial implications and administrative exigencies are valid considerations for policy decisions and that employees cannot selectively accept beneficial terms while rejecting unfavorable ones. Facts Of The Case: M.T. Mani, Respondent No. 1, joined the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in 1981 and was a member of the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) Scheme. He retired as a Manager on November 30, 2014, having received four prior opportunities between 1990 and 2000 to switch to the Pe...