https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307582 Grant-in-aid under the 1994 Odisha education scheme was a discretionary benefit dependent on prescribed conditions, approval, budgetary allocation and timely application, so no accrued or vested right survived repeal for institutions that had not secured the benefit before the 2004 Order. The saving clause protected only institutions already receiving grant-in-aid or block grant, not a mere expectation of future application, and the principle underlying Section 6 of the General Clauses Act did not preserve such uncrystallised claims. Parity and negative equality also failed because Article 14 cannot be used to extend an erroneous benefit granted in other cases. The employees' claims were therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 16 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 23 Apr 2023 13:57:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307582 Grant-in-aid under the 1994 Odisha education scheme was a discretionary benefit dependent on prescribed conditions, approval, budgetary allocation and timely application, so no accrued or vested right survived repeal for institutions that had not secured the benefit before the 2004 Order. The saving clause protected only institutions already receiving grant-in-aid or block grant, not a mere expectation of future application, and the principle underlying Section 6 of the General Clauses Act did not preserve such uncrystallised claims. Parity and negative equality also failed because Article 14 cannot be used to extend an erroneous benefit granted in other cases. The employees' claims were therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 16 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307582