Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Krishna Nand Shukla, claimed to have been appointed on an ad hoc basis as Lecturer in Military Science at Jawaharlal Nehru Smarak Post Graduate College, affiliated to Gorakhpur University, on 02.08.1991. He filed Writ Petition No.29473 of 1999 before the Allahabad High Court seeking a mandamus for payment of salary and non-interference in his functioning. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on 06.10.2015, relying on paragraphs 3(h) and 3(i) of a counter-affidavit and paragraph 6 of a rejoinder-affidavit. The appellant filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, which was withdrawn with liberty to file a review petition. The review application was dismissed by a non-speaking order on 09.03.2016. The Supreme Court, upon appeal, found that the counter-affidavit filed in the appellant's writ petition did not contain paragraphs 3(h) and 3(i), and the rejoinder-affidavit's paragraph 6 was different from what was quoted in the judgment. The High Court had apparently relied on pleadings from another connected writ petition (Writ Petition No.29474 of 1999). The Supreme Court held that the High Court's judgment could not be upheld as it was based on pleadings not on record. The review application was also dismissed without considering the specific grounds of error. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside both the judgment and the review order and remitted the matter to the High Court for fresh adjudication on merits, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim. The Court clarified that the outcome of the writ petition would affect the pending regularization petition.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Error Apparent on Face of Record - Review - The High Court dismissed the writ petition by referring to paragraphs 3(h) and 3(i) of a counter-affidavit and paragraph 6 of a rejoinder-affidavit that did not exist in the appellant's case but belonged to another connected writ petition. The Supreme Court held that the judgment could not be upheld as it was based on pleadings not on record. (Paras 10-14) B) Civil Procedure - Non-Speaking Order - Review - The High Court dismissed the review application by a non-speaking order without addressing specific grounds raised by the appellant, including the error apparent on the face of the record. The Supreme Court set aside the order and remitted the matter for fresh decision. (Paras 12, 14-15) C) Service Law - Ad Hoc Appointment - Regularization - The appellant claimed ad hoc appointment as Lecturer in Military Science and sought salary and regularization. The Supreme Court did not express any opinion on merits and left the claims to be decided by the High Court afresh. (Paras 3, 15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the writ petition by relying on pleadings from a different case, and whether the review application was properly considered.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 06.10.2015 and the order dated 09.03.2016 dismissing the review application. The matter was remitted to the High Court to decide Writ Petition No.29473 of 1999 afresh on the basis of the pleadings on record, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim.
Law Points
- Judicial review
- Error apparent on face of record
- Review petition
- Non-speaking order
- Remand
