NDLI: The State of Rajasthan Vs. Nemi Chand Mahela and Others

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	“Scarecrow” of a litigation Doctrine of res judicata Law of precedents
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Precedents – Law of precedents – “Scarecrow” of a litigation – Conflicting decisions that fail to respect and follow the precedent set by Supreme Court cause uncertainty and chaos – On facts, conflicting opinions in different decisions of High Court of Rajasthan contrary to the true and correct interpretation of the principle of prospective overruling given in decisions of the Supreme Court in Kailash Chand Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and thereafter in Manmohan Sharma v. State of Rajasthan and Others case has caused this annoying and festering litigation to prolong since 1999, that in course of time has become so complicated that no man knows what it means.Res judicata – Doctrine of res judicata and law of precedent – Difference between – Held: Res judicata operates in personam i.e. the matter in issue between the same parties in the former litigation, while law of precedent operates in rem i.e. the law once settled is binding on all under the jurisdiction of the High Court and the Supreme Court – Res judicata binds the parties to the proceedings for the reason that there should be an end to the litigation and therefore, subsequent proceeding inter-se parties to the litigation is barred – Therefore, law of res judicata concerns the same matter, while law of precedent concerns application of law in a similar issue – In res judicata, the correctness of the decision is normally immaterial and it does not matter whether the previous decision was right or wrong, unless the erroneous determination relates to the jurisdictional matter of that body – Precedents – Doctrines / Principles. Constitution of India, 1950 – Art. 141 – Binding precedent – Appointment – To post of Primary School teachers in Zila Parishads of various districts of the State of Rajasthan – Award of bonus marks on basis of domicile to candidates seeking such appointments – Challenged – Declared unconstitutional by Full Bench of Rajasthan High Court by decision dated 18-11-1999 in writ proceedings – Supreme Court affirmed the decision in Kailash Chand Sharma case, however, by applying the doctrine of prospective overruling, it protected appointments made on or before 17-11-1999 and confined relief only to those writ petitioners who had moved the High Court before 18-11-1999 – However, in several subsequent decisions of Rajasthan High Court, reliefs were granted to writ petitioners who had not filed writ petition before the cut-off date of 18-11-1999 fixed in Kailash Chand Sharma’s case – Some of these decisions were made even after the decision of Manmohan Sharma’s case on 01-04-2014 wherein the Supreme Court declined to enlarge the scope of directions issued in Kailash Chand Sharma’s case – Held: Authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court and High Court must be respected and followed as any departure therefrom would cause uncertainty, unnecessary and speculative litigation – Directions given by Supreme Court in Kailash Chand Sharma’s case were a binding precedent u/Art.141 which was affirmed and elucidated by Supreme Court in Manmohan Sharma’s case – Consequently, candidates who had not filed writ petitions on or before 17-11-1999 would not be entitled to appointment upon recalculation of marks by exclusion of bonus marks from the marks of the selected candidates – Such direction however would not apply to individual cases where decisions of High Court though contrary to the ratio in Kailash Chand Sharma case had attained finality and thus would operate as res judicata – Service Law – Appointment.Doctrines / Principles – Doctrine of prospective overruling – Invocation of – Held: Doctrine of prospective overruling can be invoked for balancing of competing claims – Supreme Court in Kailash Chand Sharma v. State of Rajasthan case while affirming the findings of a Full Bench decision of Rajasthan High Court dated 18-11-1999 held that award of bonus marks on basis of domicile to candidates seeking appointment (as primary school teachers in Zila Parishads in the State of Rajasthan) amounted to impermissible discrimination – However, keeping in view the factual matrix of the case, the Supreme Court felt that there was a need to balance competing claims and thus partially applied the doctrine of prospective overruling whereby notwithstanding the ratio, appointments made before 18-11-1999 were left untouched and saved – Ratio and direction invoking doctrine of prospective overruling, applied in Kailash Chand Sharma’s case was affirmed and elucidated by Supreme Court in Manmohan Sharma’s case – Accordingly, all pending matters before High Court, to be decided on basis of decisions in Kailash Chandra Sharma’s and Manmohan Sharma’s cases and the instant cases, subject to condonation of delay, when justified and satisfactorily explained – Service Law – Appointment.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjiv Khanna
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 588
Petitioner	The State Of Rajasthan
Respondent	Nemi Chand Mahela And Others
SCR	[2019] 18 S.C.R. 995
Judgement Date	2019-04-30
Case Number	3873

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Nemi Chand Mahela and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Raj Lakshmi Dasi and Others Vs. Banamali Sen and Others

Phool Chand Sharma and Others Vs. Chandra Shanker Pathak and Others

Nagabhushanammal (d) By Lrs. Vs. C. Chandikeswaral!ngam

Aleemuddin Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

Bihar State Government Secondary School Teachers Association Vs. Bihar Education Service Association & Ors.

K. Sivaramaiah Vs. Rukmani Ammal

Baljeet Singh & Others Vs. Risal Singh & Others

State of Rajasthan Vs. Tarachand Jain

Osman Umar Vs. Malal Alibhai Nathu and Ors

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Nemi Chand Mahela and Others

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Nemi Chand Mahela and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Raj Lakshmi Dasi and Others Vs. Banamali Sen and Others

Phool Chand Sharma and Others Vs. Chandra Shanker Pathak and Others

Nagabhushanammal (d) By Lrs. Vs. C. Chandikeswaral!ngam

Aleemuddin Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

Bihar State Government Secondary School Teachers Association Vs. Bihar Education Service Association & Ors.

K. Sivaramaiah Vs. Rukmani Ammal

Baljeet Singh & Others Vs. Risal Singh & Others

State of Rajasthan Vs. Tarachand Jain

Osman Umar Vs. Malal Alibhai Nathu and Ors

The State of Rajasthan Vs. Nemi Chand Mahela and Others