K. MADHAVA REDDY & ORS. versus GOVT. OF A.P. & ORS.

K. MADHAVA REDDY & ORS. versus GOVT. OF A.P. & ORS.

While G.O.Ms No.14 and 22 permitting promotion by transfer were rightly declared ultra vires of the Presidential Order under Article 371-D, the doctrine of prospective overruling must be invoked so that such declaration does not affect promotions and appointments made on the basis of the impugned G.O.Ms prior to 7th November, 2001, i.e., the date when the Supreme Court decided V. Jagannadha Rao. Actions taken under the then-prevailing law should not be disturbed as reverting incumbents at a late date would be unfair and administratively difficult, and would have a cascading effect prejudicing many not party to the proceedings.

Parties
Appellants: K. Madhava Reddy & Ors.; Respondents: Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment and Review Petition Dismissal
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Promotion by Transfer, Doctrine of Prospective Overruling, Validity of G.o.ms Under Presidential Order, Ultra Vires, Article 309 Proviso, Article 371 D, Appointment by Transfer, Effect of Judicial Pronouncements on Past Actions
Service Law Constitutional Law Promotion by Transfer Doctrine of Prospective Overruling Validity of G.o.ms Under Presidential Order Ultra Vires Article 309 Proviso Article 371 D +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K. Madhava Reddy & Ors.

Appellants

Government of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment and Review Petition Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the doctrine of prospective overruling can be invoked so as to protect promotions made under impugned rules prior to the Supreme Court decision in V. Jagannadha Rao's case
  2. 2 Whether G.O.Ms No.14 (1994) and No.22 (1996) permitting promotion by transfer were ultra vires of the Presidential Order under Article 371-D
  3. 3 Whether appointments and promotions made prior to the decision in V. Jagannadha Rao should be disturbed

Ratio Decidendi

While G.O.Ms No.14 and 22 permitting promotion by transfer were rightly declared ultra vires of the Presidential Order under Article 371-D, the doctrine of prospective overruling must be invoked so that such declaration does not affect promotions and appointments made on the basis of the impugned G.O.Ms prior to 7th November, 2001, i.e., the date when the Supreme Court decided V. Jagannadha Rao. Actions taken under the then-prevailing law should not be disturbed as reverting incumbents at a late date would be unfair and administratively difficult, and would have a cascading effect prejudicing many not party to the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Orders of the High Court set aside.
  • Promotions and appointments made under G.O.Ms No.14 and 22 prior to 7th November, 2001 shall not be affected.