Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ravinder Kaur Vs. Hitinder Singh

Ravinder Kaur vs Hitinder Singh

Disposition Appeal Allowed Court Supreme Court of India Decided Jan 03, 2000
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/666866

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Supreme Court of India
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Civil Appeal No. 5013 of 1993
Subject
Family;Civil
Disposition
Appeal Allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- [A.S. Anand, C.J. and; R.C. Lahoti, J.] -- Law — Appointment — Selection — Examination — Provision in rules that a candidate taking the examination must resign from his existing service — Appellant taking the examination without complying with the said provision and being selected &m...

Key legal issue
Family;Civil
Outcome / disposition
Appeal Allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ravinder Kaur

Respondent

Hitinder Singh

Legal References

Reported In
AIR2000SC3403B; II(2000)DMC590SC; JT2000(1)SC543

Court's Analysis

Prior History
Arising out of SLP (C) No. 10648 of 1993

Excerpt

- [a.s. anand, c.j. and; r.c. lahoti, j.] -- law - appointment - selection - examination - provision in rules that a candidate taking the examination must resign from his existing service - appellant taking the examination without complying with the said provision and being selected - circumstances warranting benefit of the examination despite such omission -- the appellant was appointed to the indian revenue service on the basis of the civil services examination held in the year 1989. while in service he took the indian civil services examination again in the year 1991. since the appellant did not resign from the indian revenue service before taking the indian civil services examination, 1991 the respondents, taking shelter behind rule 4 of the rules, are not permitting the appellant to join the indian administrative service to which he has been selected......1986 (the rules) provides that a candidate, taking the examination, must resign from the service to which he is already appointed. the vires of this rule has been upheld by this court in mohan kumar singhania v. union of india1. since the appellant did not resign from the indian revenue service before taking the indian civil services examination, 1991 the respondents, taking shelter behind rule 4 of the rules, are not permitting the appellant to join the indian administrative service to which he has been selected. technically no fault can be found with the stand taken by the respondents. we are, however, of the view that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case specially that the appellant sat in the 1991 examination under the directions of this court he should be given the benefit of the said examination. it is not disputed before us that several candidates similarly situated who sat in the indian civil services examinations during the period 1986-90 without resigning their jobs were given the benefit of their selection. it would be travesty of justice if the appellant is denied the fruit of his selection to the indian administrative service.4. we set aside the impugned judgment of the central administrative tribunal and direct the respondents to declare the result and consequent merit of the appellant in respect of the indian civil services examination, 1991. he shall be entitled to the appointment to the indian administrative service in the year 1991 batch as a result of the above-said examination. the appeal is allowed in the above terms. no costs.

Full Judgment

A.S. Anand, C.J. and; R.C. Lahoti, J.

1. Special leave granted.

2. The appellant was appointed to the Indian Revenue Service on the basis of the Civil Services Examination held in the year 1989. While in service he took the Indian Civil Services Examination again in the year 1991. He sat in the said examination under the interim orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal and also of this Court. It is not disputed that the appellant has qualified for the Indian Administrative Service and has achieved very high merit being at No. 29 of the merit list. The appellant belongs to the Scheduled Tribe.

3. Rule 4 of the Civil Services Examination Rules, 1986 (the Rules) provides that a candidate, taking the examination, must resign from the service to which he is already appointed. The vires of this rule has been upheld by this Court in Mohan Kumar Singhania v. Union of India1. Since the appellant did not resign from the Indian Revenue Service before taking the Indian Civil Services Examination, 1991 the respondents, taking shelter behind Rule 4 of the Rules, are not permitting the appellant to join the Indian Administrative Service to which he has been selected. Technically no fault can be found with the stand taken by the respondents. We are, however, of the view that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case specially that the appellant sat in the 1991 examination under the directions of this Court he should be given the benefit of the said examination. It is not disputed before us that several candidates similarly situated who sat in the Indian Civil Services Examinations during the period 1986-90 without resigning their jobs were given the benefit of their selection. It would be travesty of justice if the appellant is denied the fruit of his selection to the Indian Administrative Service.

4. We set aside the impugned judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal and direct the respondents to declare the result and consequent merit of the appellant in respect of the Indian Civil Services Examination, 1991. He shall be entitled to the appointment to the Indian Administrative Service in the year 1991 batch as a result of the above-said examination. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial