Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.62 seconds)T.N. Housing Board vs N. Balasubramaniun And Ors. on 15 April, 2004
In this context,
reference can be had of the decision in T.N. Housing Board
14 W.P. No.9118/2019
Vs. N. Balasubramanium (2004) 6 SCC 85; wherein it was
observed by Their Lordships in :-
Subhash S/O Fakirchand Agarwal And Ors. vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 28 June, 1993
19. Normally, statutory rules are framed under the
authority of law governing employment. No government
order, notification or circular can be substituted for the
statutory rules framed under the authority of law. A
circular letter (administrative instructions) is not a statutory
instrument and cannot replace the statutory rules framed
under Article 309 and any policy decision of State adopted
in contravention of statutory Rules would be illegal and
void. Any departmental letter or executive instructions
cannot prevail over or override, statutory rules and
constitutional provisions. [Please see: Subhash Vs. State
of Maharashtra and another 1995 Supp.
Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006
Punjab Water Supply & Sewerage Board vs Ranjodh Singh & Ors on 6 December, 2006
Mukesh Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 February, 2018
18. A similar circular issued by Medical Education
Department No. F-18-58/2000/55/vishi/1, dated
15/20.03.2001, which provided for capping of medical
reimbursement in case of open heart surgery to
Rs.1,15,000/-, came to be examined by a co-ordinate Bench
of this Court in the case of Mukesh Tiwari Vs. State of
M.P., reported in 2012 (3) MPLJ 447. While allowing the
petition, it was held that the executive instructions dated
13 W.P. No.9118/2019
15/20.03.2001, which put a capping on a maximum amount
is contrary to Rule 4(1) and (2) of the Rules of 1958 and will
not be applicable and further directed to disburse the entire
amount towards medical reimbursement as claimed by the
petitioner. The relevant paras 8 to 12 are extracted herein
below:-