The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: iStock Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said once an order has been passed on a kind of a compromise or concession, the party cannot turn back and challenge the decision before a higher court, unless it is a case of fraud or deception.
A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah dismissed a plea by the Sports Authority of India against the Delhi High Court's order that rejected their recall application against the concession made by its counsel to comply with the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal with regard to the case of respondents' employees as “initial constituents” as per the 2022 Rules.
"For all practical purposes, once an employee is considered as an “initial constituent” of SAI, it would mean that he is no longer to be treated as a contractual employee but as a regular employee, who comes under direct enrolment/control of SAI," the bench said, going through the rules.
The respondent, Dr Kulbir Singh Rana, was continuing on contractual basis as a physiotherapist (grade II) since February 20, 2021.
Meanwhile, the 2022 Rules were notified, and to bring into effect the cadre restructuring made therein, instead of renewing their contracts, the department advertised their vacancies which were to be filled by another set of physiotherapists on contractual basis.
The respondents’ name did not figure in the list. All persons earlier appointed on an ad hoc basis (including the respondents) were given an opportunity to apply against the newly sanctioned posts.
The respondents participated in the selection process and the SAI on February 09, 2023 issued a circular making a public disclosure of non-eligible candidates for High Performance Analysts on a contractual basis. This recruitment process was challenged by the respondents before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench at New Delhi, by filing an Original Application, which was allowed on November 04, 2023.
The SAI challenged the CAT's order before the High Court. However, during the hearing, its counsel agreed to comply with the CAT's order.
Subsequently, the SAI asked the High Court to recall the order, saying the concession was made without the instructions. The SAI also stated that they had actually misunderstood the order of the Tribunal.
The bench, however, said, "This petition ought to be dismissed on the mere ground that once the 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. On principle as well as on law, this is not permissible." the bench said.
On merits of the matter, the bench said, the respondents have served SAI in the past, there was a provision under the rules for their case to be considered as “initial constituents".
The Tribunal has also noted that their recruitment was done as per relevant regulations following the due selection process, the bench said.
The SAI, created in 1984 for the promotion of sports and games in India, was registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act. It comes directly under the administrative and financial control of the Union government.