Administrative circular cannot curtail transferred licence validity where statutory procedure grants balance period or six months, whichever is more.

An administrative circular could not shorten licence validity by substituting the date of endorsement of transferability for the date of transfer, where Paragraph 127(v) of the Handbook of Procedures provided that transferred licences remained valid for the balance period or six months, whichever was more. The Handbook provision was treated as having statutory force, so the circular could not curtail the benefit conferred by it unless amended in accordance with law. The Delhi HC stayed operation of sub-clause (iii) of Paragraph 2 of Circular No. 7/94 and allowed the stay application.

---

---

Issues: Whether operation of sub-clause (iii) of Paragraph 2 of Circular No. 7/94 dated 19-4-1994, which made the automatic extension of validity run from the date on which transferability was endorsed, should be stayed for apparent inconsistency with Paragraph 127(v) of the Handbook of Procedures (Volume 1) 1992-97.

Analysis: Paragraph 127(v) provided that all licences on the date of transfer would remain valid for the balance period of validity or six months, whichever was more. The impugned circular effectively substituted the date of transferability for the date of transfer, thereby shortening the period of validity in cases where the licence had already been transferred. The provision in the Handbook was treated as having statutory force, and a circular could not curtail the benefit conferred by it unless the clause itself was amended in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The operation of sub-clause (iii) of Paragraph 2 of Circular No. 7/94 was stayed, and the stay application was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: An administrative circular cannot, by interpretation or clarification, substitute a materially different triggering date so as to curtail a benefit expressly conferred by a statutory instrument having force of law.

---