Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Prasad Manohar Pandave, was a counter-clerk working in the canteen of the Income Tax Department. The Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, issued a Circular dated 11th January, 1993 making eligible canteen employees to appear in the Departmental Examination. The petitioner appeared for the examination in June 1998 and passed. However, he was not issued any order of appointment. Various representations were made from time to time. The respondents by communication dated 24th July, 2000 withdrew the concession granted vide the letter dated 11th January, 1993. As the petitioner was not issued the letter of appointment, he filed an Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal which was numbered as O.A. No.805 of 2004. The Tribunal dismissed the application. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition. The court considered whether the petitioner had a vested right to appointment based on the circular that was withdrawn before any appointment order was issued. The court held that the petitioner had no vested right to appointment as the concession was withdrawn before any right accrued. The withdrawal was valid and the petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Appointment - Withdrawal of Concession - Circular dated 11th January, 1993 - No vested right - The petitioner, a canteen employee, passed a departmental examination under a circular that was subsequently withdrawn before any appointment order was issued. The court held that the petitioner had no vested right to appointment as the concession was withdrawn before any right accrued. The withdrawal was valid and the petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner had a vested right to appointment based on a circular that was withdrawn before any appointment order was issued, and whether the withdrawal of the circular was valid.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Doctrine of legitimate expectation
- Withdrawal of concession before accrual of right
- No vested right to appointment based on examination passed under a circular subsequently withdrawn
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (04) 230
Writ Petition No.1831 of 2004
F.I. Rebello, S.P. Kukday
Mr. N.K. Nesari with Mr. V.K. Damle, for the Petitioner; Mr. Suresh Kumar with Mr. D.A. Dubey, for the Respondents
Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi; Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the dismissal of Original Application by Central Administrative Tribunal regarding non-appointment based on a withdrawn circular.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought appointment to a post based on passing a departmental examination under a circular that was later withdrawn.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was not issued appointment order despite passing the examination, and the concession was withdrawn.
Previous Decisions
Central Administrative Tribunal dismissed O.A. No.805 of 2004.
Issues
Whether the petitioner had a vested right to appointment based on the circular dated 11th January, 1993.
Whether the withdrawal of the circular by communication dated 24th July, 2000 was valid.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he had a legitimate expectation of appointment after passing the examination under the circular.
Respondents argued that the circular was withdrawn before any appointment order was issued, and no right accrued.
Ratio Decidendi
The petitioner had no vested right to appointment as the concession was withdrawn before any appointment order was issued. The withdrawal of the circular was valid.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner was a counter-clerk working in the canteen in the Income-tax Department.
The petitioner appeared for the examination in June, 1998. The petitioner passed the said examination. He, however, was not issued any order of appointment.
Respondents by communication dated 24th July, 2000 withdrew the concession granted vide letter dated 11th January, 1993.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed O.A. No.805 of 2004 before Central Administrative Tribunal which was dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the present writ petition before the High Court.
