LexUNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus ATULSHUKLA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
_(2014) 14 S.C.R. 1151 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. A v. ATULSHUKLA (Civil Appeal Nos. 4717-4719 of2013) SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 B [T. S. THAKUR AND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.] Service Law- Retirement age - Classification - Indian Air Force - Different retirement age for Time Scale (TS) Officers and Select Officers -Validity- Held: Difference in C employability of Time Scale officers vis-a-vis Select officers is more illusory than real - The Air HQ can, depending upon its perception, order deployment and post any officer found suitable for the job - Deployment remains an administrative matter and unless the same involves any reduction in pay, allowances or other benefits or reduction in rank or status of D an officer legally impermissible, such deployment remains an administrative prerogative of the competent authority - Classification made by the Government of India for purposes of different retirement age for Time Scale Officers and Select E Officers does not stand scrutiny on the touchstone of Arts, 14 and 16 of the Constitution - Constitution of India - Arts. 14 and 16. Constitution of India -Art. 14 - Content and sweep of- Con stitutional validity of a classification - Tests for F determination - Held: Art. 14 prohibits class legislation and not reasonable classification - A classification passes the test of Art. 14 only if (i) there is an intelligible differentia between those grouped together and others who are kept out of the group; and (ii) there exists a nexus between the G differentia and the object of the legislation. Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. In the case at hand, the difference in employability of Group Captains (TS) is not borne out to justify the classification made by the Government. It is H 1151 ' 1152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 14 S.C.R. A evident from the particulars given by the respondents that several Group Captains (TS) have held appointments which are also held by Group Captains (Select). If that be so, the difference in the employability of Time Scale officers vis-a~vis select officers appears 8 to be more illusory than real. There does not appear to be any hard and fast rule on the question of deployment or employability of Group Captains (TS) or Group Captains (Select) for that, matter. The Air HQ can, depending upon its· perception, order deployment and c post any officer found suitable for the job. Deployment remains an administrative matter and unless the same involves any reduction in pay, allowances or other benefits or reduction in rank or status of an officer legally impermissible, such deployment remains. an o administrative prerogative of the competent authority. [Para 37][1186-H; 1187-A-D] 1.2. The basis for classification in question for purposes of age of superannuation which the appellant has projected is much too tenuous to be accepted as a E valid basis for giving to the Time. Scale Officers a treatment different from the one given to the Select Officers. Also, concerns arising from a parity in the · retirement age of Time Scale and Select Officers too are more perceptional than real. At any rate, such concerns F remain to be substantiated on the basis of any empirical data. The classification made by the Government of India for purposes of different retirement age for Time Scale Officers and Select Officers does not stand scrutiny on the touchstone of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution · G as rightly held by the Tribunal. [Para 38][1187-D-G] H State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali AIR 1952 SC 75 : 1952 SCR 284 ; Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Director, CBI and Anr. AIR 2014 SC 2140 : 2014 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. ATUL SHUKLA 1153 (8) SCC 682 ; Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Shri . A Justice S.R. Tendolkar& Ors. AIR 1958 SC 538: 1959 SCR 279 ; Lachhman Das v. State of Punjab AIR 1963 SC 222: 1963 SCR 353; E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974) 4 SCC 3: 1974 (2) SCR 348 ; Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India B (1978) 1SGC248: 1978 (2) SCR 621 ; Col. A.S. Iyer& Ors. v. Bala Subramanyan & Ors.(1980) 1 SCC 634 : 1980 (1) SCR 1036 ; Air India v. Nargesh Mirza §Jnd Ors. (1981) 4 SCC 335 : 1982 (1) SCR 438 and Kamlakar and Ors. v. Union of C India & Ors. (1999) 4 SCC 756- referred to. CASE LAW REFERENCE 1952 SCR 284 referred to Para 10 2014 (8) sec 682 referred fo Para 10 D 1959 SCR 279 referred to Para 11 1963 SCR 353 referred to Para 12 1974 (2) SCR 348 referred to Para 13 1978 (2) SCR
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.