High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court Allahabad High Court Denies Tax Refund for Hybrid Vehicle Purchased Before Electric Vehicle Exemption Policy Entering A Room with Someone Cannot, By Any Stretch Of Imagination, Be Considered Consent For Sexual Intercourse: Bombay High Court No Specific Format Needed for Dying Declaration, Focus on Mental State and Voluntariness: Calcutta High Court Delhi High Court Allows Direct Appeal Under DVAT Act Without Tribunal Reference for Pre-2005 Tax Periods NDPS | Mere Registration of Cases Does Not Override Presumption of Innocence: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Previous Antecedents and No Communal Tension: High Court Grants Bail in Caste-Based Abuse Case Detention of Petitioner Would Amount to Pre-Trial Punishment: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in Dowry Harassment Case Loss of Confidence Must Be Objectively Proven to Deny Reinstatement: Kerala High Court Reinstates Workman After Flawed Domestic Enquiry Procedural lapses should not deny justice: Andhra High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Canteen Subsidy Constitutes Part of Dearness Allowance Under EPF Act: Gujarat High Court Concurrent Findings Demonstrate Credibility – Jharkhand High Court Affirms Conviction in Cheating Case 125 Cr.P.C | Financial responsibility towards dependents cannot be shirked due to personal obligations: Punjab and Haryana High Court Mere Acceptance of Money Without Proof of Demand is Not Sufficient to Establish Corruption Charges Gujrat High Court Evidence Insufficient to Support Claims: Orissa High Court Affirms Appellate Court’s Reversal in Wrongful Confinement and Defamation Case Harmonious Interpretation of PWDV Act and Senior Citizens Act is Crucial: Kerala High Court in Domestic Violence Case

SCST Commission Has No Power to Enforce Promotion: Punjab And Haryana High Court Sets Aside Punjab State Scheduled Caste Commission's Order For Employee Promotion

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment pronounced on May 15, 2024, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has nullified an order by the Punjab State Scheduled Caste Commission directing the promotion of a retired Assistant Executive Engineer, Surinder Pal, to the position of Senior Executive Engineer. The court, presided by Justice Namit Kumar, held that the Commission exceeded its jurisdiction as its powers are confined to making recommendations and conducting investigations, rather than issuing binding directives.

Jurisdiction of the Commission: The court meticulously analyzed the jurisdictional boundaries of the Punjab State Scheduled Caste Commission, established under the Punjab State Commission for Scheduled Castes Act, 2004. Justice Kumar emphasized, "The Commission's role is inherently investigatory and recommendatory. It does not possess the authority to enforce its recommendations as binding directives."

Legal Precedents: Citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in All India Indian Overseas Bank SC and ST Employees’ Welfare Association v. Union of India (1996) 6 SCC 606, Justice Kumar reiterated that similar commissions, including the National Commission for Scheduled Castes, do not have adjudicatory powers. He noted, "The Supreme Court has clearly delineated that such commissions can only investigate and recommend but cannot issue enforceable orders."

Analysis of the Present Case: The judgment detailed the procedural history, including the various representations made by Surinder Pal and the corresponding responses by the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited. Despite Pal’s continued efforts through multiple forums, including an earlier writ petition, his claim for promotion was consistently declined. The Commission’s subsequent order directing his promotion was deemed overreaching.

Justice Namit Kumar stated, "The powers conferred upon the State Commission are analogous to those of the National Commission, which are limited to recommending measures and investigating complaints without the authority to enforce these recommendations."

Decision: The High Court’s decision to set aside the Commission’s order reinforces the principle that state commissions have a limited mandate focused on advocacy and investigation rather than enforcement. This judgment underscores the judiciary's role in maintaining the constitutional boundaries of quasi-judicial bodies and ensures that administrative and legal processes adhere to established jurisdictional limits.

Date of Decision: 15th May 2024

Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Punjab State Scheduled Caste Commission and another

 

Similar News