Case Note & Summary
The Union of India and others appealed against the judgment of the Delhi High Court dismissing their writ petition challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal's order allowing Original Application No.4320 of 2014 filed by Bhagwan Deen and another. The Tribunal had allowed the application based on the LARSGESS Scheme floated by Indian Railways. However, the Punjab & Haryana High Court had adversely commented on the Scheme in CWP No.7714 of 2016, and the Special Leave Petition against that judgment was dismissed by the Supreme Court. Subsequently, the Union of India terminated the Scheme on 05.10.2019. The Supreme Court noted that it had consistently refused to accept any right flowing from the Scheme. Therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in passing directions, and the High Court erred in rejecting the challenge. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Tribunal and High Court orders, and dismissed the Original Application. No order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - LARSGESS Scheme - No Enforceable Right - The Supreme Court held that no right flows from the LARSGESS Scheme, which was terminated by Union of India on 05.10.2019, and consistently refused to uphold any rights under it. The Tribunal and High Court erred in passing directions based on the Scheme. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal and High Court were justified in upholding rights under the LARSGESS Scheme after its termination by Union of India.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. The orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal and Delhi High Court are set aside. Original Application No.4320 of 2014 is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- LARSGESS Scheme
- No enforceable right
- Scheme terminated
- Tribunal not justified
- High Court erred
Case Details
Civil Appeal No.2720 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.6220 of 2022 arising out of Diary No.2153 of 2019)
Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal against High Court judgment dismissing writ petition challenging Tribunal order allowing Original Application based on LARSGESS Scheme.
Remedy Sought
Appellants (Union of India) sought to set aside the Tribunal and High Court orders and dismiss the Original Application.
Filing Reason
The Tribunal allowed the respondents' application based on the LARSGESS Scheme, which was later terminated and consistently not upheld by the Supreme Court.
Previous Decisions
Central Administrative Tribunal allowed Original Application No.4320 of 2014; Delhi High Court dismissed Writ Petition (Civil) No.4859 of 2017 on 29.05.2017.
Issues
Whether the Tribunal and High Court were justified in upholding rights under the LARSGESS Scheme after its termination and adverse judicial comments.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the Scheme was terminated and no rights flow from it; respondents' rights under the Scheme were not enforceable.
Ratio Decidendi
The LARSGESS Scheme does not confer any enforceable rights, especially after its termination by Union of India, and the Supreme Court has consistently refused to uphold any rights under it.
Judgment Excerpts
This Court has since then consistently refused to accept, acknowledge and uphold any right flowing from the provisions of the Scheme.
Viewed thus, the Tribunal was not justified in passing directions in the instant matter and the High Court was in error in rejecting the challenge raised by the appellants.
Procedural History
Original Application No.4320 of 2014 filed by respondents before Central Administrative Tribunal, allowed. Union of India challenged via Writ Petition (Civil) No.4859 of 2017 before Delhi High Court, dismissed on 29.05.2017. SLP filed before Supreme Court, delay condoned, leave granted, appeal allowed on 05.04.2022.
