Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Rajasthan vs Shankar Lal Lakhera on 16 October, 2023
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2023
(arising out of SLP(C) NO. 20091 OF 2022)
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SHANKAR LAL LAKHERA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
In our order dated 25.11.2022, we had observed that we would not be interfering with the impugned judgment, in so far as directions are issued for appointment to persons who had applied for the post of Stenographer and Office Assistant Staff.
Issue of notice was restricted to the directions given by the High Court that the appellant – State of Rajasthan shall carry out necessary amendments in the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Rules, 2013 (the Rule) mandating grant of bonus marks, which stipulation was deleted/withdrawn with effect from 08.06.2016.
We are clearly of the view that the said directions of the High Court are unsustainable as they exceed the courts’ power of judicial review. The framing of rules is an administrative act, which is an exercise to be carried out by the appellant - State of Signature Not Verified Rajasthan.
Digitally signed byDeepak Guglani
The rules, as framed, if they violate Article 14, any Date: 2023.10.20 18:40:31 IST Reason:
of the fundamental rights, statutory provisions or are totally arbitrary, can be challenged by the aggrieved person. Mandamus in 2 the nature of policy direction should not have been issued by the High Court.1 Recording the aforesaid, we delete the directions passed by the High Court, whereby the appellant – State of Rajasthan has been directed to amend the Rule to incorporate grant of additional bonus marks for working experience etc. The directions of the High Court with regard to appointments, it is stated, have already been implemented, but with a rider/disclaimer that the appointments are subject to the outcome of the present appeal. As we are not interfering with the appointments, the rider/disclaimer shall be deleted/withdrawn.
The impugned judgment is partly set aside and the appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
.................J. (SANJIV KHANNA) .................J. (S.V.N. BHATTI) NEW DELHI;
OCTOBER 16, 2023.
1 See – Reepak Kansal v. Union of India, (2021) 9 SCC 251;
Rachna and Others v. Union of India and Another, (2021) 5 SCC 638; Bal Ram Bali and Another v. Union of India, (2007) 6 SCC 805; and Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja, (2003) 6 SCC 195. 3
ITEM NO.56 COURT NO.3 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 20091/2022 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 29-07-2022 in DBCWP No. 7316/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur) STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS SHANKAR LAL LAKHERA & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 48236/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No. 168306/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 16-10-2023 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI For Petitioner(s) Dr. Manish Singhvi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, AOR Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Adv.
Mr. Aishwary Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Dhananjai Shekhwat, Adv.
Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Adv.
Mr. Anirudh Singh, Adv.
Mr. Dashrath Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhati, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(DEEPAK GUGLANI) (R.S. NARAYANAN) AR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(signed order is placed on the file)