TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 1525
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. The Respondents 1 to 9 herein, filed a writ petition before the High Court praying for quashing of the Recruitment Rules 2005 as well as the letters by which the writ Petitioners were told to appear in the Limited Internal Competitive Examination for promotion to the post of Raj Bhasha Adhikari AD(OL) which was to be held under the supervision of the CGMT UP(East), Circle , Lucknow as well as issuing a writ of mandamus restraining the Appellants herein from interfering in the working of the Respondents as AD(OL) on their respective posts and to continue to pay them their salaries. The aforesaid writ petition was allowed by the impugned judgment and hence this appeal. 4. It wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Article 309 of the Constitution. In 1983, there were 43 posts of Hindi Officers in the department and it was provided that 50% of the posts will be filled up by direct recruitment, 30% by promotion and 20% by transfer on deputation. The essential qualification for holding the post was Masters Degree in the concerned subject and 5 years' experience of teaching, research, writing or journalism in Hindi. As far as promotions were concerned, it was stipulated that Hindi Translator Grade-I with 3 years' regular service in the grade could be selected by a Departmental Promotion Committee in consultation with the Union Public Service Commission. 8. In April 1994, the Department of Telecommunications decided that since the subordinate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Internal Competitive Examination. It is these Rules which have been struck down by the High Court. 11. It may be mentioned that the Respondents herein were never regularly promoted as Hindi Officer at any point of time either under the 1984 Rules or Recruitment Rules, 2002. They had never been appointed on the basis of the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee duly approved by the Union Public Service Commission. In fact, they were appointed purely on a local officiating basis under the powers delegated to the Heads of Telecom Circles on the basis of administrative instructions dated 28.4.1994. Thus, they were never regular appointees and hence had no vested rights for promotion to the post of Hindi Officer under the R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tally incorrect. In State of Punjab and Ors. v. Arun Aggarwal and Ors. (2007) 10 SCC 402, it was observed (in para 30): There is no quarrel over the proposition of law that the normal rule is that the vacancy prior to the new Rules would be governed by the old Rules and not the new Rules. However, in the present case, we have already held that the Government has taken a conscious decision not to fill the vacancy under the old Rules and that such decision has been validly taken keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the casee 15. In the present case, a conscious decision was taken in 2005 providing that all the posts in question should be filled up by Limited Internal Competitive Examination. This was a policy decision and we c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....maller benches must be understood to mean that a vested Constitutional right cannot be taken away by amendment of the rules. It follows that if the vested right is not a Constitutional right it can be taken away by retrospective amendment of the rules. A legislative act can destroy existing rights, (unless it is a Constitutional right). Thus, even a taxing statute can be made retrospectively, and this usually affects existing rights vide Union of India v. Madangopal AIR 1954 SC 158, Jawaharlal v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1966 SC 764 (770), Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar AIR 1958 SC 452, D.G. Gouse and Co. v. State of Kerala, AIR 1980 SC 271 (para 16), Shetkari Sahkari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. v. Collector AIR 1979 SC 1972 (para 6-....