LexSPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ANR. versus DR. KULBIR SINGH RANA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 1547 : 2025 INSC 319 Sports Authority of India & Anr. v. Dr. Kulbir Singh Rana (Civil Appeal No(s). 2289-2291 of 2025) 04 March 2025 [Sudhanshu Dhulia* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in dismissing an application for recalling an order passed on a concession made by the Appellant’s counsel? Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal has correctly interpreted the recruitment rules while directing the Appellant to treat the Respondents as ‘Initial Constituents’? Headnotes† Concession made by a party in Court – Recall application against order passed based on such concession rightly rejected – Recall permissible in case of fraud or deception – Impugned judgment upheld – Appeals dismissed: Held: Sports Authority of India, the Appellant, challenged an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal directing the Respondents to be considered as ‘Initial Constituent’ under the 2022 Recruitment Rules before the High Court – During the hearing, counsel for the Appellant said it would not like to press the petition on merits, and prayed for time to comply with the Tribunal’s directions – Writ petition disposed of by High Court as per request – Appellant did not consider Respondents as ‘initial constituents’ as directed – Instead filed two recall applications against the High Court’s order – Only ground taken by Appellant’s counsel was that it had misunderstood the Tribunal’s order – No affidavit by client to say that counsel was not authorised or instructed to give a concession – Applications dismissed by High Court vide impugned judgment – Held, recall applications rightly rejected – When order has been passed on a kind of a compromise or concession given by a party, that party cannot turn back and challenge the order before a higher court, unless it is a case of fraud or deception. [Paras 9 and 10] * Author 1548 [2025] 3 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Appointment of Respondents – Tribunal found the appointment not to be illegal but only irregular – Therefore, Respondents entitled to be considered as ‘Initial Constituents’ under 2022 recruitment rules – Held, as they are to be considered as ‘initial constituent’, they are to be treated as regular employees of Appellant – Reasoning of Tribunal correct – No merit in appeals: Held: Tribunal directed the Appellant to consider the Respondents as ‘initial constituent” under the 2022 Recruitment Rules after observing that their appointment was not illegal, but only irregular – There is provision under the recruitment rules to consider them as ‘Initial Constituents’ – Reasoning of Tribunal correct – Once an employee is considered as an ‘Initial Constituent’ of Appellant, no longer to be treated as a contractual employee but as a regular employee – Concession regarding their status as ‘Initial Constituents’ already been made by Appellant before the High Court – No merit in appeals. [Paras 11, 12 and 13] List of Acts Sports Authority of India (Sports Sciences and Sports Medicine) Staff Recruitment Rules, 1992; Sports Authority of India (Service) Bye Laws and Conditions of Service Regulations 1992. List of Keywords Concession; Compromise; Recall application. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No(s). 2289-2291 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 28.02.2024 in WP(C) No. 2920 of 2024 and dated 26.11.2024 in CMAPPL No(s). 45440 and 45441 of 2024 by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi With Civil Appeal No(s). 2296-2298 of 2025 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellants: Rakesh Kumar Khanna, Sr. Adv., Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra, Sugam Kumar Jha, Sreedass K. P., Aditya P. Khanna, Raghav tandon, Ms. Awantika Manohar. [2025] 3 S.C.R. 1549 Sports Authority of India & Anr. v. Dr. Kulbir Singh Rana Advs. for the Respondent: Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Ms. Rani Mishraa, Abhimanue Shrestha, Ms. Sridevi Panikkar, Pritesh Patni, Nishant Kumar. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. 1. Sports Authority of India (for short ‘SAI’) was created in the year 1984 and was registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The necessity for creating a society is reflected in a resolution dated 25th January, 1984 of the Department of Sports, Government of India, wherein the objective of the society was stated to be ‘promotion of sports and games in India’. SAI is directly under the administrative and financial
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.