Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2015 (2) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1402 - SC - Indian LawsApplicability of G.O. Ms. 124 dated 7th March, 2002 to the posts for which selection process has already started pursuant to 1999 advertisement - retrospective in nature or not - If the said G.O. Ms. is retrospective, whether it is required to review the entire select list disturbing the appointments already made during the period between the 2001 and 7th March, 2002? - HELD THAT:- In Shah Bhojraj Kuverji Oil Mills and Ginning Factory v. Subhash Chandra Yograj Sinha [1961 (4) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT], the Constitution Bench of this Court while considering the question as to whether an Act is to be made operative prospectively or retrospectively held a section may be prospective in some parts and retrospective in other parts. While it is the ordinary rule that substantive rights should not be held to be taken away except by express provision or clear implication, many Acts, though prospective in form, have been given retrospective operation, if the intention of the legislature is apparent. A statutory provision is held to be retrospective either when it is so declared by express terms, or the intention to make retrospective clearly follows from the relevant words and the context in which they occur. By Presidential order, 1975 the State Government has not been empowered to pass any order under sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 3 or paragraph 8 with retrospective effect. Apart from the fact that the State Government was not empowered by the Presidential Order, 1975 to pass any orders with retrospective date, in absence of any terms or the intention to make it retrospective date, the G.O. Ms. No. 124 dated 7th March, 2002 cannot be given effect from a retrospective date - In any case, the State Government cannot pass any order amending a procedural law regarding reservation in the matter of selection to posts, with retrospective effect, once the procedure of selection starts. The G.O. Ms. No. 124 dated 7th March, 2002 is prospective and is not applicable to the process of selection started pursuant to Advertisement No. 10 of 1999 including the 973 executive posts which were ordered to be filled up by the High Court pursuant to the advertisement. The Tribunal erred in directing the APPSC to re-caste the merit list pursuant to G.O. Ms. No. 124 dated 7th March, 2002. The High Court by the impugned judgment dated 27th December, 2004 rightly held that the order passed by the Court will not affect the appointments already made to the executive post between 2001-2002 but erred in holding that the selection is to be made in accordance with G.O. Ms. No. 124 dated 7th March, 2002. The Respondents are directed to fill up the rest of the posts including the posts of Municipal Commissioners Grade-III, Asstt. Commercial Tax Officers, Asstt. Labour Officers in executive cadre and Asstt. Section Officers in non executive cadre, which are vacant, as per President Order, 1975 and the Government orders in consonance with the Presidential Order which were prevailing in the year 1999 when the Advertisement was issued. The inter se seniority between the persons appointed in the 1st round and the persons appointed afterwards in the same cadre, if any, shall be decided by the appropriate authority in accordance with the rules, depending on the merit ranking obtained by them. Appeal allowed.
|