GUMAN SINGH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

GUMAN SINGH versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

Rules 28B and 32 are valid and not violative of Articles 14 and 16 as they provide a framework for merit-based promotions, with sufficient implied guidelines for assessment by senior personnel. However, the circular dated August 27, 1966, prescribing a marking system inconsistent with the rules, is invalid....

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Guman Singh; Respondent: State of Rajasthan; Respondent: Respondent No. 3 (in C.A. No. 1815/1970); Respondent: Respondents Nos. 1, 32, 33 (in W.P. No. 139/1970)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 July 1971
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal and Writ Petitions Under Article 32 / Appeal by Special Leave From Division Bench Judgment of Rajasthan High Court and Original Petitions Under Art. 32 Before Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; orders of promotions to be reviewed.
Legal Topics
Promotion and Seniority in Public Service, Validity of Service Rules, Guidelines for Merit Based Selection, Effect of Uncommunicated Adverse Entries, Executive Instructions Vs. Statutory Rules
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Service Law Promotion and Seniority in Public Service Validity of Service Rules Guidelines for Merit Based Selection Effect of Uncommunicated Adverse Entries Executive Instructions Vs. Statutory Rules

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Guman Singh

Appellant

State of Rajasthan

Respondent

Respondent No. 3 (in C.A. No. 1815/1970)

Respondent

Respondents Nos. 1, 32, 33 (in W.P. No. 139/1970)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal and Writ Petitions Under Article 32 / Appeal by Special Leave From Division Bench Judgment of Rajasthan High Court and Original Petitions Under Art. 32 Before Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Rules 28B(2) and 32 of the Rajasthan Administrative Service Rules, 1954, are violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution due to absence of guidelines regarding determination of merit for promotions.
  2. 2 Whether the circular dated August 27, 1966 prescribing marking system for merit determination in promotions is invalid as being contrary to the statutory Rules.
  3. 3 Whether the promotion committee's consideration of uncommunicated adverse remarks in confidential reports is permissible.

Ratio Decidendi

Rules 28B and 32 are valid and not violative of Articles 14 and 16 as they provide a framework for merit-based promotions, with sufficient implied guidelines for assessment by senior personnel. However, the circular dated August 27, 1966, prescribing a marking system inconsistent with the rules, is invalid. Consideration of uncommunicated adverse remarks in confidential reports for promotion is impermissible. Promotions based on such procedures are to be reviewed afresh under the Rules alone.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; orders of promotions to be reviewed.

Orders

  • The circular dated August 27, 1966, is struck down as invalid.
  • Officiating promotions and confirmations of respondents 2 to 4 made by orders dated January 4, 1967 and January 22, 1970, to be reviewed and reconsidered by the Departmental Promotion Committee and State Government, without reference to the impugned circular.