VINOD KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

VINOD KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

Second representations against adverse entries or mercy petitions after exhausting prescribed remedies and lapse of substantial time are not maintainable. Administrative authorities have power to review and set aside prior ultra vires or illegal orders, provided principles of natural justice are followed. Judicial review is limited to questions of irrationality, unreasonableness, or procedural impropriety. Mercy petitions after revision, without new material, are inadmissible under applicable Police Rules.

Parties
Appellant: Vinod Kumar; Respondents: State of Haryana & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeals in the first and third groups dismissed; appeals/petitions of police officials in second group allowed; State appeals in second group dismissed.
Legal Topics
Annual Confidential Report, Adverse Entry, Departmental Remedies, Mercy Petition, Judicial Review, Administrative Review, Disciplinary Proceedings, Compulsory Retirement
Service Law Administrative Law Annual Confidential Report Adverse Entry Departmental Remedies Mercy Petition Judicial Review Administrative Review +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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vinod Kumar

Appellant

State of Haryana & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a second representation against adverse entry in the Annual Confidential Report is maintainable after exhausting departmental remedies and lapse of substantial time
  2. 2 Whether restoration of adverse remarks or penalty was correct based on procedural infirmities or ultra vires acts
  3. 3 Scope of administrative review and overturning decisions of predecessors by successor officers

Ratio Decidendi

Second representations against adverse entries or mercy petitions after exhausting prescribed remedies and lapse of substantial time are not maintainable. Administrative authorities have power to review and set aside prior ultra vires or illegal orders, provided principles of natural justice are followed. Judicial review is limited to questions of irrationality, unreasonableness, or procedural impropriety. Mercy petitions after revision, without new material, are inadmissible under applicable Police Rules.

Court Disposition

Appeals in the first and third groups dismissed; appeals/petitions of police officials in second group allowed; State appeals in second group dismissed.

Orders

  • In first group, restoration of adverse remarks/penalties upheld; appeals dismissed.
  • In second group, orders restoring adverse remarks set aside; appeals allowed.