J C YADAV Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
LAWS(SC)-1990-2-15
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on February 20,1990

J.C.YADAV Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

RAM SARUP VS. STATE OF HARYANA [RELIED ON]
JIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [DOUBTED]
ASHOK GULATI VS. B S JAINAND [RELIED ON]



Cited Judgements :-

SHIVANI GUPTA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2012-12-68] [REFERRED TO]
U K SUBRAMANIAM VS. N MEENAKSHI [LAWS(MAD)-2007-4-344] [REFERRED TO]
PREM PRAKASH SHARMA AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF H.P. AND ANR. [LAWS(HPH)-2010-5-131] [REFERRED TO]
STATE & ORS VS. MAHARAJ KRISHAN BHAT & ORS [LAWS(J&K)-2002-11-30] [REFERRED]
D. BHAKTHAVACHALAM VS. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT [LAWS(MAD)-2019-9-150] [REFERRED TO]
RAJEEV MANKOTIA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2022-6-8] [REFERRED TO]
M R GUPTA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-1996-7-280] [REFERRED]
HEMANT SHESH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-7-34] [REFERRED TO]
SHEWALI KAKOTI VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2016-9-28] [REFERRED TO]
C.K. SRINIVASAN VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2013-1-216] [REFERRED TO]
K K KHOSLA VS. STATC OF HARYANA [LAWS(SC)-1990-2-17] [FOLLOWED]
A N SEHGAL VS. RAJE RAM SHEORAN [LAWS(SC)-1991-4-37] [REFERRED TO]
VIVEK GUPTA VS. STATE OF J&K [LAWS(J&K)-2006-2-17] [REFERRED TO]
MUBARIK AHMAD MIR VS. STATE OF J&K [LAWS(J&K)-2009-6-19] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN KUMAR AGARWAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2000-1-56] [REFERRED]
B. MENGHANI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2014-3-31] [REFERRED TO]
DAGE TARAK VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(GAU)-2009-12-20] [REFERRED TO]
ALL B.ED. DEGREE HOLDERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2013-10-2] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS VS. SANDIP KUMAR ROY AND OTHERS [LAWS(DLH)-2016-5-349] [REFERRED TO]
SAPNA CHANNA VS. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2014-9-93] [REFERRED TO]
S SUMNYAN VS. LIMI NIRI [LAWS(GAU)-2009-2-3] [REFERRED TO]
Rajagopal S. S/o Subrayappa and others VS. The Honble The Chief Justice and The Registrar General High Court of Karnatka [LAWS(KAR)-2010-12-119] [REFERRED TO]
OBANG PANKAM & 3 OTHERS VS. DOGO TARAK [LAWS(GAU)-2012-4-120] [REFERRED TO]
K. GOVINDARAJ VS. CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR TAMIL NADU GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LTD. [LAWS(MAD)-2019-9-221] [REFERRED TO]
M.KANGEYAN VS. CHIEF ENGINEER - PERSONAL [LAWS(MAD)-2019-9-449] [REFERRED TO]
DR.S.REVWATHY VS. THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2016-11-5] [REFERRED TO]
SUNITHA VENKATRAM AND ORS. VS. DIVYA RAYAPATI [LAWS(MAD)-2015-3-446] [REFERRED TO]
DIPANKAR GOGOI VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2022-5-61] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH PATHK VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(GAU)-2005-3-19] [REFERRED TO]
M K KRISHNAMURTHY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-2000-9-5] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR SRIVASTAVA VS. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST [LAWS(ALL)-2005-10-80] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR UPPAL VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [LAWS(SC)-1998-1-15] [RELIED ON]
INDRA KUMAR MEENA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2009-5-48] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR BHAT VS. STATE OF JANDK [LAWS(J&K)-2010-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
SHILLQNG BENCH M LAITPHLANG VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(GAU)-2004-1-24] [REFERRED TO]
NEHA AND OTHERS VS. VIKRAM UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER [LAWS(MPH)-2018-5-196] [REFERRED TO]
PRABHAKANT AYODHYAPRASAD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2001-8-35] [REFERRED TO]
S.ANBARASI VS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT [LAWS(MAD)-2019-9-388] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. ARVINDKUMAR T. TIWARI [LAWS(SC)-2012-9-13] [REFERRED TO]
S L CHOPRA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(SC)-1991-4-49] [REFERRED TO]
LAIRENLAKPAM POIREITON MEITEI VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(MANIP)-2021-2-2] [REFERRED TO]
GH HASSAN MALA VS. STATE OF J&K [LAWS(J&K)-2002-7-19] [REFERRED TO]
MUKHTAR UL AZIZ VS. STATE OF J and K [LAWS(J&K)-2004-6-2] [REFERRED TO]
Pradeep Kumar Kognolkar VS. Union of India [LAWS(MPH)-2005-8-140] [REFERRED TO]
RAM DULARI DEVI VS. JOINT DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION [LAWS(ALL)-1999-9-182] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TRIPURA VS. RAJU GHOSH [LAWS(CHH)-2013-3-41] [REFERRED TO]
K. KAVITHA VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2020-3-41] [REFERRED TO]
HARPINDER PAL SINGH VS. RAJIV PRASHAR [LAWS(SC)-2016-7-121] [REFERRED TO]
BHUPENDRA NATH HAZARIKA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(SC)-2012-11-46] [REFERRED TO]
DHANAKAR THAKUR VS. MECON LIMITED [LAWS(JHAR)-2018-8-5] [REFERRED TO]
D D UPADHYAYA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1998-7-26] [REFERRED TO]
BHARATI DEVI VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2017-1-50] [REFERRED TO]
DR. M. LAITPHLANG AND ORS. VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2004-1-63] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL KUMAR DWIVEDI VS. BASIC SHIKSHA ADHIKARI BANDA [LAWS(ALL)-2002-12-87] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRA PAL SINGH VS. STATE OF U P AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-2-456] [REFERRED TO]
R SUNDAR RAJU VS. V RAMAKRISHNAN [LAWS(MAD)-2006-11-95] [REFERRED TO]
SANDEEP KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-1997-2-68] [RELIED ON]
STATE OF TRIPURA VS. RAJU GHOSH [LAWS(GAU)-2013-3-1] [REFERRED TO]
ANNETTE LALRINSANGI VS. STATE OF MIZORAM [LAWS(GAU)-2016-7-66] [REFERRED TO]
PARAS VS. CHAITANYA KASHYAP [LAWS(MPH)-2015-1-6] [REFERRED TO]
SENGSIME A. SANGMA VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(MEGH)-2014-5-1] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA AGRAWAL VS. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-1993-9-88] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI DANI BELO VS. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(GAU)-2011-4-21] [REFERRED TO]
BIBEKANANDA DAS VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2004-11-20] [REFERRED TO]
SITARAM SINGH VS. MEGHALAYA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD [LAWS(GAU)-2006-10-6] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(SC)-2014-9-111] [REFERRED TO]
GEETA MAHADEVAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2001-8-104] [REFERRED 4.]
S. KISHORE CHAND AND ORS. VS. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-7-212] [REFERRED TO]
DR.K.KAVITHA VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2020-3-14] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. SUKHJINDER JIT SINGH AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-22] [REFERRED TO]
M.C. NANDEESHA VS. ML BOWMIK AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2006-4-41] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Singh, J. - (1.)This appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dated 15th January, 1980 quashing the Notification dated 3rd May, 1973 issued by the State Government of Haryana promoting the appellants to the Haryana Service of Engineers Class I post (Public Health Branch).
(2.)The facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellants S /Sh. J. C. Yadav, B. R. Batra, O. P. Juneja, S. L. Chopra, M. S. Miglani, C. P. Taneja, SurJit Singh and V. P. Gulati and respondent Vyas Dev were members of the Haryana Service of Engineers Class II in the Public Health Branch. Members of the Class II service are eligible for promotion to Class I posts in accordance with the provisions of the Haryana Service of Engineers Class I Public Works Department (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules). In 1971 the appellants were promoted to the post of Executive Engineers in the cadre of Class I on ad hoc basis while Vyas Dev respondent was not considered for promotion. He made representation but nothing came out in his favour. Later a Committee was constituted under Rule 8 for selecting suitable members of Class II service for promotion to Class I post. The Committee considered the case of appellants and Vyas Dev respondent, but it did not find the respondent suitable for promotion, his name was not included in the select list prepared by the Committee while the names of the appellants were included therein. The Selection Committee's recommendation was approved by the Public Service Commission and it was forwarded to the State Government. Since the appellants did not possess the requisite minimum period of service of eight years' in Class II service as required by Rule 6(b) and as no other suitable candidates were available, the Selection Committee made recommendation to the State Government for granting relaxation to the appellants. The Committee's recommendation was reiterated by the Public Service Commission. The State Government accepted the recommendations and appointed the appellants to Class I service by the Notification dated May 3, 1973.
(3.)Vyas Dev, respondent challenged validity of the appellants' promotion by means of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on the ground that the appellants did not possess requisite qualification for promotion to Class I service, therefore their promotions were contrary to Rules. His further grievance was that he was not considered along with the appellants for promotion and he was not afforded opportunity of hearing before he was superseded. A learned single Judge of the High Court dismissed the petition on the finding that the Selection Committee had considered the case of Vyas Dev along with the appellants for promotion but he was not found suitable. As regards the. appellants' promotions the learned Judge held that since the State Government had relaxed Rule 6(b) in their favour their promotions were sustainable in law. The learned Judge further held that no personal hearing was necessary to be afforded to Ved Vyas before his supersession. On appeal by the respondent a Division Bench of the High Court set aside the order of the single Judge and quashed the appellants' promotions on the sole ground that the State Government had no authority in law to grant relaxation to the appellants under Rule 22 in a general manner, as the power of relaxation could be exercised only in individual cases to mitigate hardship caused to an individual. On these findings the Division Bench set aside the appellants' promotions.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.