Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court heard appeals arising from a service matter concerning the continuation of the petitioners. Leave was granted, and notice was issued confining to the question as to why the petitioners may not be continued till the regularly selected candidates are appointed and taken charge. A counter-affidavit was filed by C.L. Khanna, Deputy D.S.E. in the office of the Joint Director, Public Instructions, Bhopal Division, Bhopal (M.P). The counter-affidavit stated that the regularly selected candidates had already been appointed and taken charge, and the respective dates on which the selected candidates had taken charge were given in Annexure R. Under these circumstances, the limited relief for which notice was issued could not be granted. The appeals were dismissed. No statutory provisions or precedents were cited. The decision turned entirely on the factual position that the regular candidates had already assumed charge, rendering the petitioners' continuation infructuous.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Continuation of Service - Interim Relief - Not mentioned - The Supreme Court considered whether the petitioners could be continued in service until regularly selected candidates were appointed and taken charge; the counter-affidavit filed by the Deputy D.S.E. stated that regularly selected candidates had already been appointed and taken charge on specified dates; therefore the limited relief for which notice was issued could not be granted and the appeals were dismissed - Held that the relief becomes infructuous once regularly selected candidates have joined (Paras 1).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners may be continued till the regularly selected candidates are appointed and taken charge.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals because the regularly selected candidates had already been appointed and taken charge, and thus the limited relief for which notice was issued could not be granted.
Law Points
- Relief for continuation becomes infructuous once regularly selected candidates are appointed and taken charge
- appeals dismissed.
Case Details
1995 LawText (SC) (12) 69
K. Ramaswamy, B.L. Hansaria
JT 1995 (9) 67, 1995 SCALE (7)200
Bahadur Sihgh Naroda & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Service/employment appeal regarding continuation of petitioners until regularly selected candidates are appointed and take charge.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought continuation in service until regularly selected candidates were appointed and taken charge.
Filing Reason
The notice was issued confining to the question as to why the petitioners may not be continued till the regularly selected candidates are appointed and taken charge.
Issues
Whether the petitioners may be continued till the regularly selected candidates are appointed and taken charge.
Submissions/Arguments
Counter-affidavit filed by C.L. Khanna, Deputy D.S.E. in the office of the Joint Director, Public Instructions, Bhopal Division, Bhopal (M.P.), stated that the regularly selected candidates have already been appointed and taken charge, with dates given in Annexure R.
Ratio Decidendi
When the regularly selected candidates have already been appointed and taken charge, the limited relief of continuation for the petitioners becomes infructuous and the appeals must be dismissed.
Judgment Excerpts
Leave granted. After notice was issued confining to the question as to "why the petitioners may not be continued till the regularly selected candidates are appointed and taken charge", counter-affidavit has been filed by one C.L. Khanna, Deputy D.S.E. in the office of the Joint Director, Public Instructions, Bhopal Division, Bhopal (M.P).
It is stated therein that the regularly selected candidates have alreaby been appointed and taken charge, vide Annexure R.
Under these circumstances, the limited relief for which notice was issued cannot be granted. The appeals are dismissed.
Procedural History
Leave granted by Supreme Court; notice issued limited to question of continuation; counter-affidavit filed by C.L. Khanna, Deputy D.S.E., office of Joint Director, Public Instructions, Bhopal Division, Bhopal (M.P.), stating regularly selected candidates already appointed and taken charge; appeals dismissed.
