https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298237 A proviso inserted into the AIIMS Amendment Act, 2007 was challenged for prematurely terminating the incumbent Director's tenure and limiting compensation. The Supreme Court treated the office as a tenure post and noted that curtailment of such tenure requires justifiable reasons and compliance with natural justice. It found the proviso targeted the existing Director alone, without any intelligible differentia, and therefore amounted to naked discrimination rather than a valid general policy or mere change in service conditions. The amendment was described as ultra vires and unconstitutional under Article 14, with restoration in office and consequential benefits stated as the resulting relief. en-us Thu, 08 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:40:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298237 A proviso inserted into the AIIMS Amendment Act, 2007 was challenged for prematurely terminating the incumbent Director's tenure and limiting compensation. The Supreme Court treated the office as a tenure post and noted that curtailment of such tenure requires justifiable reasons and compliance with natural justice. It found the proviso targeted the existing Director alone, without any intelligible differentia, and therefore amounted to naked discrimination rather than a valid general policy or mere change in service conditions. The amendment was described as ultra vires and unconstitutional under Article 14, with restoration in office and consequential benefits stated as the resulting relief. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 08 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298237