Nothing further need be done in a matter where the Scheme stands terminated: SC

The Scheme stands terminated and is no longer in existence, nothing further need be done in the matter. The Scheme provided for an avenue of a back door entry into the service of the railways. This would be fundamentally at odds with Article 16 of the Constitution. The Union government has with justification discontinued the scheme. The petitioners can 4 claim neither a vested right nor a legitimate expectation under such a Scheme. All claims based on the Scheme must now be closed. (Para 6)

Manjit and Ors V/s Union of India and Anr

Writ Petition (Civil) No 78 of 2021

Decided on 29th January, 2021

A Three-Judge Bench comprising of Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Sanjiv Khanna dismissed a petition filed under Article 32 which pleaded to issue a writ of Mandamus against the Union of India to appoint the petitioners in their respective cadres

The dispute in the present case relates to a scheme, popularly termed as the Larsgess Scheme, which had been adopted by the Railway Administration previously. The Punjab and Haryana High Court passed orders on 27 April 2016 and 14 July 2017 requiring the Union of India to reconsider the Scheme. The orders of the High Court were evidently based on the fact that the Scheme provided for an entry into service for certain wards of serving employees without undergoing a competitive selection consistent with the requirement of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

The Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution to seek the following reliefs:

(I) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to appoint the petitioners in their respective cadres; and

(II) Issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the facts and circumstances of the case.

On 5 March 2019, the Union of India took a decision to terminate the Scheme. Following the above decision, on 6 March 2019, this Court disposed of IA 18573 of 2019 in Miscellaneous Application No 346 of 2019 in Miscellaneous Application No 1202 of 2018 in SLP (C) No 508 of 2018 by observing that “since the Scheme stands terminated and is no longer in existence, nothing further need be done in the matter”.

This Court hence concluded that “The reliefs which have been sought in the present case, as already noted earlier, are for a writ of mandamus to the Union of India to appoint the petitioners in their respective cadres. A conscious decision has been taken by the Union of India to terminate the Scheme. This has been noticed in the order of this Court dated 6 March 2019, which has been extracted above. While taking this decision on 5 March 2019, the Union of India had stated that where wards had completed all formalities prior to 27 October 2017 (the date of termination of the Scheme) and were found fit, since the matter was pending consideration before this Court, further instructions would be issued in accordance with the directions of this Court. Noticing the above decision, this Court, in its order dated 6 March 2019, specifically observed that since the Scheme stands terminated and is no longer in existence, nothing further need be done in the matter. The Scheme provided for an avenue of a back door entry into the service of the railways. This would be fundamentally at odds with Article 16 of the Constitution. The Union government has with justification discontinued the scheme. The petitioners can claim neither a vested right nor a legitimate expectation under such a Scheme. All claims based on the Scheme must now be closed.” (Para 6)

Thus, the Court concluded that

“In view of the above factual background, we are not inclined to entertain the petition under Article 32. The grant of reliefs to the petitioners would only enable them to seek a back door entry contrary to the orders of this Court. The Union of India has correctly terminated the Scheme and that decision continues to stand.” (Para 7)

The Petition was dismissed.

View/Download Judgment: Manjit and Ors V/s Union of India and Anr

Risikesh Dhanaki