1997 (9) TMI 107 - SC - Customs

Article 14 claim to extend exemption notification based on others' wrong exemptions rejected; illegal parity cannot be demanded

The dominant issue was whether a claimant could invoke Article 14 to demand extension of an exemption notification merely because similar exemption had ... Exemption notification - Discrimination - principle of equality enshrined under Article 14 - HELD THAT:- We fail to see how Article 14 can be attracted in case where wrong orders are issued in favour of others. Wrong orders cannot be perpetuated with the help of Article 14 on the basis that such wrong orders were earlier passed in favour of some other persons and, therefore, there will be discrimination against others if correct orders are passed against them. In fact, in the case of Union of India (Railway Board) & Ors.[1995 (12) TMI 379 - SUPREME COURT], the same learned Judge in his judgment has observed in para 21 that the principle of equality enshrined under Article 14 does not apply when the order relied upon is unsustainable in law and is illegal. Such an order cannot form the basis for holding that other employees are discriminated against under Article 14. The benefit of the exemption notification, in the present case, cannot, therefore, be extended to the petitioner on the ground that such benefit has been wrongly extended to others. With respect, the decision in Mediwell Hospital [1996 (12) TMI 51 - SUPREME COURT] does not lay down the correct law on this point. In the premises, the special leave petition is dismissed. Issues involved: 1. Recall of order due to judgment of another Bench 2. Application of Article 14 in granting relief Recall of order due to judgment of another Bench: The petition for special leave was initially dismissed by a Bench of two Judges but was later recalled in light of a judgment by another Bench in a similar matter. The recall was deemed necessary to remove ambiguity on the question of law by a judgment of a 3-Judge Bench. The Court heard the parties and noted that the judgment in the similar matter did not differ on the merits of the case.Application of Article 14 in granting relief: The Court granted relief in the similar matter based on Article 14 to prevent discrimination against the appellant. However, it was argued that Article 14 should not be invoked to perpetuate wrong orders issued in favor of others. The principle of equality under Article 14 does not apply when the order relied upon is unsustainable in law and is illegal. Therefore, the benefit of exemption notification cannot be extended to the petitioner based on incorrect extensions to others. The decision in the similar matter was deemed not to lay down the correct law on this point.In conclusion, the special leave petition was dismissed based on the above considerations.