Sant Ram vs State on 8 December, 2017
Crl. Appeal No. 328/2016 Sant Ram Vs. State page 5of 5
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 836 (1.02 seconds)Documents citing
Sant Ram Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan & Anr on 7 August, 1967
Annai J.K.K Sampoorani Ammal vs The Registrar on 14 October, 2019
Generally speaking, an administrative order confers
no justiciable right, but this rule, like all other
general rules, is subject to exceptions. This Court
has held in Sant Ram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan3
that although Government cannot supersede
statutory rules by administrative instructions, yet, if
the rules framed under Article 309 of the
Constitution are silent on any particular point, the
Government can fill up gaps and supplement the
rules and issue instructions not inconsistent with the
rules already framed and these instructions will
govern the conditions of service.
Partha Das vs The State Of Tripura on 28 August, 2025
“20. The office memorandum dated December 7, 1961
which purports to amend the United Provinces Service of
Engineers (Buildings and Roads Branch) Class II Rules, 1936 in
our opinion cannot override, amend or supersede statutory
rules. This memorandum is nothing but an administrative order
or instruction and as such it cannot amend or supersede the
statutory rules by adding something therein as has been
observed by this Court in Sant Ram Sharma v. State of
Rajasthan [AIR 1967 SC 1910 : (1968) 1 SCR 111 : (1968) 2
LLJ 830] . Moreover the benefits that have been conferred on
the temporary Assistant Engineers who have become members
of the service after being selected by the Public Service
Commission in accordance with the service rules are entitled to
have their seniority reckoned in accordance with the provisions
of Rule 23 as it was then, from the date of their becoming
member of the service, and this cannot be taken away by giving
retrospective effect to the rules of 1969 and 1971 as it is
arbitrary, irrational and not reasonable.”
11 (1987) 3 SCC 622, 1987 INSC 163.
Unknown vs Medical Council Of India on 11 October, 2012
This Court has held in Sant Ram Sharma v. State of Rajasthan3 that although Government cannot supersede statutory rules by administrative instructions, yet, if the rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution are silent on any particular point, the Government can fill up gaps and supplement the rules and issue instructions not inconsistent with the rules already framed and these instructions will govern the conditions of service.
State Of Gujarat And Anr. vs K.A. Patel And Ors. on 22 November, 1972
The present case before us is more akin to Sant Ram v. State of Rajasthan (supra) than to Mohammad Bhakar v. Y. Krishna Reddy and State of Haryana v. Shamsher Jang.
Partha Das vs The State Of Tripura on 28 August, 2025
“20. The office memorandum dated December 7, 1961
which purports to amend the United Provinces Service of
Engineers (Buildings and Roads Branch) Class II Rules, 1936 in
our opinion cannot override, amend or supersede statutory
rules. This memorandum is nothing but an administrative order
or instruction and as such it cannot amend or supersede the
statutory rules by adding something therein as has been
observed by this Court in Sant Ram Sharma v. State of
Rajasthan [AIR 1967 SC 1910 : (1968) 1 SCR 111 : (1968) 2
LLJ 830] . Moreover the benefits that have been conferred on
the temporary Assistant Engineers who have become members
of the service after being selected by the Public Service
Commission in accordance with the service rules are entitled to
have their seniority reckoned in accordance with the provisions
of Rule 23 as it was then, from the date of their becoming
member of the service, and this cannot be taken away by giving
retrospective effect to the rules of 1969 and 1971 as it is
arbitrary, irrational and not reasonable.”
11 (1987) 3 SCC 622, 1987 INSC 163.
Dr.P.Rajaji vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 29 September, 2008
We have already discussed the ratio in Sant Ram's case (supra) and held that it does not at all help the case of the government in the instant case.
Pooja Meena D/O Devi Narayan Meena vs State Of Rajasthan on 18 March, 2026
"58. A Constitution Bench of this Court while dealing with a
similar issue in respect of executive instructions in Sant Ram
Sharma v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1967 SC 1910, held: (AIR
p. 1914, para 7)
"7. ... It is true that the Government cannot amend or
supersede statutory rules by administrative
instructions, but if the rules are silent on any particular
point the Government can fill up the gaps and
supplement the rules and issue instructions not
inconsistent with the rules already framed."
State Of H.P vs Sanjay Gupta on 3 November, 2015
In Sant Ram Sharma vs. State of Rajasthan and others
of
AIR 1967 SC 1910, the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme
Court held that even in absence of statutory rules governing
rt
promotions framed by the Government it can always issue
administrative instructions regarding the principles to be followed.
State Of H.P vs Sanjay Gupta on 3 November, 2015
In Sant Ram Sharma vs. State of Rajasthan and others
of
AIR 1967 SC 1910, the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme
Court held that even in absence of statutory rules governing
rt
promotions framed by the Government it can always issue
administrative instructions regarding the principles to be followed.