Supreme Court of India
THE STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. versus RAGUVEER SINGH YADAV AND ORS.
- Decided
- 8 August 1994
- Judges listed
- K. RAMASWAMY, N. VENKATACHALA
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Citations
- Official
- [1994] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 459 · 1994 INSC 304
- Also cited as
- (1994) 6 SCC 151
Learned from how other judgments cite this one, in their text or in the official Supreme Court Reports' lists of cases they refer to: each is cited this way by at least two judgments, and at least twice as often as any other citation to this judgment in that report. We hold no commercial reporter's text, only these citation strings.
- Not shown
- 1 other citation string that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.
Cited by
Cited in 1 other Supreme Court judgment we hold.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
Delay condoned. Leave granted.
p. 460, margin F
This appeal arises from the order of the M.P. Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in 0.A. No. 2484/89, dated October 12, 1993 directing the appellant to proceed with the selection of the candidates without taking into' account the amendment made to the Rules, introducing the B.Sc. as a qualification for consideration of the applications of candid~tes. The facts lie in a short copass :
p. 460, margin F
For recru.itment to the posts of Inspectors, Department of Weights and Measures in the State of M.P., an advertisement was issued on July 27, 1987 calling for applications from eligible candidates. The qualification prescribed for eligibility was degree in Arts or Commerce or Science or Engineering or Diploma in Engineering. It would appear that written exammations were held and result were declared on August 26, 1989. Thereafter, the Board issued interview cards to the successful candidates. In the meanwhile, the Government amendment the Rules by M.P. Standard of Weights and Measurement (Enforcement) Rules, 1989 in consultation with Government of India and Public Service Commission and altered the eligibility qualification for appointment to those posts by presenting degree in Science with Physics as a subject or Degree in Engineering or Technology or Diploma in Engineering. The respondents challenged the Amended Rules on lhe ground that having issued the Notification for filling up the posts of Inspectors with Degree of Arts and Commerce the State had to proceed with the recruitment only as per the qualification prescribed in the Notification and the subsequent amendment to the Rules should not stand in the way of the Recruitment Board to Consider the claims on the basis of marks secured in the examination and also interview to be held. In other words the amended rules have no retrospective operation. This contention was found favour with the Tribunal and accordingly the Tribunal allowed the application.
pp. 460–461, margin H
It is not in .dispute that Statutory Rules have been made introducing Degree in Science or Engineering or Diploma in Technology as qualifications for recruitment to the posts of Inspector of weights and Measure. It is settled law that the State has got power to prescribe qualifications for recruitment. Here is a case that pursuant to Amended Rules, the Government has withdrawn the earlier notification and wants to proceed with recruitment afresh. It is not a case of any accrued right. The candidates who had appeared for the examination and passed the written examination had only legitimate expectation to be considered of their claims according to the rules then in vogue. The amended rules have only prospective operation. The Government is entitled to conduct selection in accordance with the change rules and make final recruitment. Obviously no candidate acquired any vested right against the State. Therefore, the State is entitled to withdraw the notification by which it had previously notified recruitment and to issue fresh notification in that regard on the basis of the amended rules.
p. 461, margin E
The ratio inP. Mahendran & Ors.,v. State of Kamataka & Ors., AI.R. (1990) SC 405 has no application to the facts in this case. In that case, for the posts of Motor Vehicles Impector, apart from the qualifications prescribed, they issued additional qualifications and selection was sought to be made on the basis of additional qualifications. It was held that since recruitment was sought to be made on the basis of the qualifications prescribed, the additional qualifications prescribed thereafter have no retrospective effect to the recruitment already set in motion. Under those circumstances, additional qualifications were directed not to be taken into aceount for considering the claims of the candidates on the basis of the original advertisement. The ratio therein clearly inapplicable to the facts · in this case.
pp. 461–462, margin H
The appeal is accordingly allowed but in the circumstances without costs. The State is dir~cted to issue fresh notification within a period of six weeks from the data of the receipt of this order for recruitment in accordance with the amended rules. A.G. Appeal allowed.
p. 462, margin C
t.
p. 462, margin C