Holding

The State Government lawfully exercised its power to relax the recruitment rules to prevent genuine hardship, making the promotion of the five appellants valid.

Summary

The appellants, permanent Junior Scale Stenographers, sought promotion to Senior Scale Stenographer. Only six candidates qualified a prescribed test, but the State Recruitment Board recommended an additional 26 candidates whose performance was nearest to the standard. The Government initially did not act, later amended the recruitment rules to allow promotion on seniority, gave the amendment retrospective effect, and finally promoted five of the 26 candidates on 19 December 1986 by relaxing the speed standards. Writ petitions challenged both the retrospective amendment and the promotion. The High Court set aside the promotion, holding the Board could not recommend relaxation and the Government lacked power to do so. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and Section 124 of the J&K Constitution, the State Government possessed the power to relax recruitment rules to avoid genuine hardship, and that the relaxation exercised in promoting the five appellants was proper and non‑arbitrary. Consequently, the promotion order was upheld.

Issues considered

The State Government's power to relax the prescribed standards for promotion under Art. 309 of the Constitution of India and Sec. 124 of the J&K Constitution.
Whether the relaxation of the recruitment rules in favour of the five appellants was arbitrary or capricious.
Whether the State Recruitment Board could validly recommend promotion by relaxing the standards.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Art. 309
Constitution of Jammu & Kashmirs. Sec. 124

Subjects

service lawpromotionrelaxation of rulesadministrative lawArticle 309Jammu & Kashmir recruitment rulesseniorityhardship

Judgment

A ASHOK KUMAR UPPAL AND ORS.
v.
STATE OF J&K AND ORS.

JANUARY 14, 1998

B [S. SAGHIR AHMAD, D.P. WADHWA, JJ.]

Service Law :

J. & K. Secretariat (Subordinate} Services Recruitment Rules, 1972-
C Rules 5(J}(B}, Substituted by SRO 76 read with SRO 177-Promotion-Power
a/Government to relax standard prescribed for promotion-Validity-Candidates
nearest to prescribed standard and topping merit list were promoted by
relaxing standard prescribed for promotion-Relaxation of Rules made to
obviate genuine hardships caused to class of employees-Held, act of the
D Government neither arbitrary nor capricious-Hence, promotion by relaxing
rules is proper-J. & K. Civil Services (Decentralisation of and Recruitment
to Non-Gazetted Cadres} Rules, 1969, Rules 1(2), 14-Constitution of Jammu
and Kash1~ir, proviso to Sec. 124-Constitution of India, Art. 309

The appellants and respondents no. 2 to 7 were permanent Junior
E Scale Stenographers in Government Departments. Vacancies were available
in the cadre of Senior Stenographer. For the selection of suitable candidates
for such appointments a test was contemplated under J. & K. Secretariat
(Subordinate) Services Recruitment Rules, 1972. The test was conducted by
the Recruitment Board constituted under the Rules. Only six candidates
however qualified the test and were recommended for appointment. Since the
F vacancies were still available the Board suggested 26 more candidates whose
performance were found to be nearest to the prescribed standard for their
appointment as Senior Scale Stenographer by relaxing the standard
prescribed under the Rules.

G The State Government although appointed the six persons, took no
decision with regard to those 26 candidates. Those candidates filed a Writ
Petition, praying for direction to the State Government for their appointment.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition with the obseri'ation that the
Government can reject the recommendation of the Recruitment Board for
the reasons to be recorded otherwise if the appointments are made, the select
H list in accordance with the rules should be adhered to;
164
-l
A.K. UPPAL v. STATE OF J& K 165
The State Government in the meanwhile amended the rule and made A
'--< promotion on the posts of Senior Scale stenographer on the basis of seniority,
but promotion in this manner could be made only if there are more vacancies
then the name recommended hy the State Recruitment Board, with the result
that additional vacancies after accommodating those who had qualified in the
test, could be filled up on the basis of seniority alone. The amended rule was
B
._,,._ given retrospective effect from 4-12-84.

Five of the 26 candidates made a representation to the State Government
and on their representation they were promoted to the post of Senior Scale
Stenographer by the State Government by relaxing the Rules vide its order
dated 19th December 1986. c
The retrospective effect of the amended rule and the promotion of the
five candidates were challenged in Writ Petitions. The Writ Petition
challenging the retrospective effect of the amended rule was dismissed on
_.._ the ground that the Government could exercise such power, conferred upon
it by the virtue of Proviso to Section 124 of the Constitution of Jam mu and D
Kashmir.
....
The writ petition challenging the appointment of the 5 persons was
allowed and the appointment by relaxing the rules was set aside on the
finding that such a recommendation could not have been legally made by the E
State Recruitment Board nor could those persons be treated as persons
selected for appointment, the Government had no power to relax the prescribed
standard particularly as no Rule, empowered the State Government to relax
the prescribed standard. The Letter Patent Appeal against the order was
dismissed in Iimine. Hence, this appeal.
F
- ""· Allowing the appeal, this Court

HELD: 1.1. Power to relax the Recruitment Rules or any other Rule
made by the State Government, under Art. 309 of the Consiitution of which
the corresponding provision is contained in Sec. 124 of the Constitution of
Jammu and Kashmir, is conferred upon the Government to meet any emergent
G
--.: situation where injustice might have been caused or is likely to be caused
to any individual employee or class of employees or where the working of
the Rule might have become impossible. Under service jurisprudence as also
the Administrative Law, such a power has necessarily to be conceded to the
employer particularly the State Government or the Central Government who H
166 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] I S.C.R.
f
-
I-

A have to deal with hundreds of employees working under them in different
departments including the Central or the State Secretariat. )-..

[174 G-H; 175-A]
1.2. When test for promotion to post of senior scale stenographers
was heid and the candidates who were far below in merit list and even failed
B in the test were promoted on the basis of their seniority by amending
recruitment Rules providing for appointment on basis of the merit and ~
suitability, retrospectively, the subsequent action of Government in promoting
)
candidates who were nearest to the prescribed standard and topping the
merit list by relaxing the standard prescribed for promotion would be proper j...

when there were vacancies available. Relaxation of Rules under such
c circumstances was made to obviate genuine hardship caused to a class of
employees and the act of Government would be neither arbitrary not capricious.
[173-F; 174 D-GJ

State of Maharashra v. Jagannath Achyut Karandikar, AIR (1989) SC
D 1133, [i989] 1 SCR 947 = (1989] Supp. 1 SCC 393; J.C. Yadav and others l_
v. State of Haryana and others, (1990) 2 SCC 189 Sandeep Kumar Sharma '
v. State of Punjab and others, [1997] 10 SCC 298, relied on.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4950of1991.

E From the Judgment and Order dated 1.3.91 of the Jammu & Kashmir
High Court in L.P.A. No. 79 of 1990.

D.D. Thakur, E.C. Agarwala, Mahesh Agrawal, Atual Sharma, N.N. Bhat
and D.K. Garg for the Appellants.

F Ashok Mathur for State of J & K and D.K. Garg for the Respondents. .._
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J. The appellants as also respondents 2 to 7 were
permanent Junior Scale Stenographers in the Secretariat and other Government
G Departments. For promotion to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer, they
were required to possess a speed of 80 words per minute in shorthand and
r
40 words per minute in typewriting. They could not attain that standard, but
the spate of litigation filed by them against each other in quick succession,
did really match their speed, whatever it be, in shorthand and typewriting.
H Without showing signs of fatigue and breathlessness, they started the litigation
A.K. UPP AL v. STA TE [S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J.] 167

in 1984 and now in 1998 they seem to be, today, at the end of the litigative . A
race.

2. Promotion from Junior Scale Stenographers to the Senior Scale
Stenographers are made in terms of the Rules knows as "J&K Secretariat
(Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1972" made by the State Government
in exercise of its power under the Provisio to Section 124 of the Constitution B
of Jammu & Kashmir. Rule 5(1 )(B) thereof, relating to the method of appointment/
recruitment to the post of Senior Scale Stenographers, originally provided as
under:

"Senior Scale Stenographers (340-700) :
c
(i) 75% by selection from class II category 'B' having not less than
3 years service in that category and on the basis of a test in
shorthand and typewriting for which minimum speed should be
80 and 40 words per minute respectively :
Provided that in the case of such Junior Scale Stenographers of D
,
_)_ the Civil Secretariat as have attained the age of fifty years or
above, the Government may consider, on individual basis and
with due regard to merit, seniority and suitability, their
appointment to the posts of Senior Scale Stenographers without
appearing in the prescribed test.
E
(ii) 25% by direct recruitment from the in-service candidates having
not less than 5 years service !n the category of Junior
Stenographers .and on the basis of a test in shorthand and
typewriting for which the minimum speed should be 80 and 40
words per minute respectively.
F
,J. 3. In 1984, a number of vacancies in the cadre of Senior Scale
Stenographer were available. Since the Rule contemplated a test for the
selection of suitable candidates for appointment as Senior Scale Stenographer,
a requisition was sent by the State Government to the State Recruitment
Board constituted under the J&K Civil Se\"vices (Decentralised & Recruitment G
to Non-Gazetted Cadres) Rules, 1969 to hold the test.

4. Out of I 00 candidates drawn from Secretariat and other Government
departments, who were called for the test held on 4.12.1984, only 78 appeared
in the test of which the result was communicated to the Government by the
Secretary of the State Recruitment Board on 2.1.1985, indicating that only six H
168 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998) 1 S.C.R.

A had qualified in the test as they alone were found to possess a speed of 80
words per minute in shorthand and 40 words per minute in typewriting. The
names of those six candidates were consequently recommended for
appointment as Senior Scale Stenographer. The Recruitment Board, however,
made a further recommendation as under:

B "Since the number of available vacancies in the discussions held with
the Deputy Secretary General Department is far greater than the number
intimated earlier by the General Department, the State Recruitment
Board would suggest that 26 candidates (listed in amiexure to this
letter in order of merit) who are nearer to the prescribed standard may
also be considered for appointment as Senior Scale Stenographers in
c relaxation prescribed standard against the available vacancies."

5. The Board suggested the names of 26 more candidates whose
performance (Between 71 to 79 words per minute in shorthand) was found to
be nearest 'to the proscribed standard for their appointment as Senior Scale
D Stenographers by relaxing the standard prescribed under the Rules.

6. The State Government considered the matter, but, although it
appointed the six persons who had qualified in the test as Senior Scale
Stenographers, it took no decision with regard to those twenty six other
candidates who then represented to the Government and prayed that in terms
E of the recommendation of the State Recruitment Board, they .may be also
promoted to the post of Senior Scale Stenographers. When their representation
remain_ed undisposed of, they approached the High Court and filed _Writ
Petition No. 193 of 1985 praying for a direction to the State Government to
appoint them as Senior Scale Stenographers. They also prayed for the interim
relief that no promotions on the post of Senior Scale Stenographers be made
F during the pendency of the Writ Petition which relief, incidentally, was granted
by the High Court by order dated 23.2.1985. This order was, however, vacated
on 23.4.1985 when the Writ Petition itself was dismissed by the High Court
with the following observations:

"Having considered the arguments advanced in the facts and
G
circumstances of the present case we find that the authority of their
Lordships of the Supreme Court is distinguishable on facts in the
present case, although the principle cannot be denied that once the .4,
selection is made by the Recruitment Board in accordance with the
Rules prescribed, the qualific3tion and the result of the test for selection,
H Government can reject the recommendation for the reasons to be
A.K. UPPAL v. STATE [S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J.] 169

recorded otherwise if the appointments are made, the select list in A
accordance with the rules shall have to be adhered to. In the present
case in accordance with the letter Annexure-R-1 of the Recruitment
Board, it is pertinent to note that the list of 26 candidates suggested
by the Recruitment Board the respondents shall take into account the
list, which has been recommended by the Recruitment Boanl otherwise B
in future selection they will adhere to the rules subject to which the
···~ selections are made.

With the above said observations, we don't find any merit in the
present writ petition, the petition is, therefore, dismissed as premature
and also the connected CMPs. The stay order passed by this court C
on February 2, 1985 CMP NO. 365 of 1985 stands vacated."

7. It may be stated that the State Government, during the. pendency
of the above Writ Petition, and, significantly, just two days after the interim
order dated 23.2.1985 was passed, amended the Rules by SRO 76 dated
25.2.1985 by substituting the following in place of existing Rule 5(1) (B): D
"B - Senior Scale Stenographers (825-1240):

By selection form Class I Category 'B' having not less than three
years service in that category and on the basis of a qualifying test
in shorthand and type-writing for which the minimum speed should E
be 80 and 40 words respectively :

Provided that in case t!Je number of available vacancies exceeds the
number of qualified officials recommended by the test holding agency,
the remaining vacancies after accommodating those who have qualified
in the test should be filled up by promotion on the basis of seniority." F
- ,I.. 8. The amended Rule, specially its Proviso, thus opened the door to
promotion on the posts ofSenior Scale Stenographer merely on the basis of
seniority irrespective of the speed in shorthand and typewriting, but promotion
in this manner could be made only if there were more vacancies than the
names recommended by the State Recruitment Board with the result that
G
additional vacancies, after accommodating those who had qualified in the
test, could be filled up on the basis of seniority alone.
4':
9. On 1:3.5.1985, the State Government iss~ed SRO 177 by which the
amendments introduced by SRO 76 were given retrospective effect by
providing that the Rule shall be deemed to have been amended with effect H
170 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] 1 S.C.R.

A from 4.12.84. This date is the date on which the test was held by the State
Recruitment Board. On the same day, namely, on 13th May, 1985, the State r~
Government promoted 33 Junior Scalt; Stenographers to the posts of Senior
Scale Stenographers on the basis of their seniority. These 33 Stenographers
did not include any of the 26 Stenographers regarding whom the State
B Recruitment Board had suggested that they may be promoted by relaxing the
Rules.

JO. Five of these 26 Stenographers made a representation to the State
Government that they, having been recommended by the State Recruitment
Board for promotion to the posts of Senior Scale Stenographers, may be
C promoted on those posts by accepting the suggestion of the Board that the
Rules in their cases may be relaxed. The Government accepted their
representation and promoted them to the posts of Senior Scale Stenographers,
by order dated 19th December, 1986 by relaxing the requirement of possessing
the speed of 80 words per minute in shorthand and 40 words per minute in
typewriting. This order was challenged by G.R. Sharma and others in W.P. No.
D 101 of 1987 on the ground that they being the next into the seniority list,
should have been promoted as Senior Scale Stenographers on the basis of
their seniority, in place of those 5 persons who were promoted by relaxing the
Rules.

E 11. SRO 177 of 1985, which gave retrospective effect to SRO 76, was
challenged in Writ Petition No. 1341 of 1986 on the ground that the Government
was not competent to give retrospective operati?n to SRO 76 of 1985.

12. Both the Writ Petitions, namely, Writ Petition NO, 1341 of 1986 and
10 I of 1987, were heard by a Single Judge (Chief Justice, S.S. Kang) and by
F judgment dated December 21, 1990, Writ Petition No, 1341 of 1986 was
dismissed with the finding that the Government could give retrospective ~-
effect to the Service Rules made by it in exercise of the power conferred upon
it by the Proviso to Section 124 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir.
Writ Petition No. I 0 I of 1987 was, however, allowed and the appointrr:ent of
G 5 persons on the basis of the recommendation of the State Recruitment Board
that they may be promoted by relaxing the Rules, was set aside with the
finding that such a recommendation could not have been legally made by the
State Recruitment Board nor could those persons be treated as persons selected
for appointment. It was also held that the Government had no power to relax the
prescribed standard perticularly as no Rule, empowering the State Government to
H relax the prescribed standard, was brought to the notice of the court.
A.K. UPPAL v. STATE [S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J.] 171
13. The Letters Patent Appeal, filed against the above judgment, was A
"'· dismissed in limine by the Division Bench on I st March, 1991. It is in these
s:ircumstances that the_ matter is now before us.

14. We are informed by D.D. Thakur, that during the pendency of this
appeal, Gobind Ram Sharma, who had filed Writ Petition No. IOI of 1987, had
already been promoted as Senior Scale Stenographer. We are also informed B
-.;._ that the Rule of promotion was again amended in 1995 and the requirement
of a qualifying test, prescribed under the Rule for making promotion to the
.post of Senior Scale Stenographer, has been completely dispensed with and
it has been provided that promotion shall be made only on the basis of
seniority. Thereafter, all the appellants were promoted as Senior Scale C
Stenographers and are working as such.

15. Normally, since all the appellants have already been promoted as
Senior Scale Stenographers, we would have dismissed the appeal as infiuctuous
but Mr. D.D. Thakur, Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants,
has contended that it is not a matter of mere promotion to the posts of Senior D
Scale Stenographers but it is the question of seniority of the appellants, a
matter of prime importance, which is involved as an important factor in this
appeal. It is contended by him that if it is held ultimately by this Court that
their appointment as Senior Scale Stenographers by the State Government on
19th December, 1986 by relaxing the prescribed standard, as recommended by
the State Recruitment Board was properly made, they shall be treated to have E
been promoted as Senior Scale Stenographers with effect from that date and
will, in that ~ven, rank senior to all those who were promoted to that cadre
subsequent to their promotion. This is a question which is not directly in
issue in this petition as the only question with which we are concerned in
this appeal is whether the Government could, in the particular circumstances F
of this case, specially when there was already a suggestion of the State
Recruitment Board, relax the prescribed standard and promote the appellants
to the posts of Senior Scale Stenographers. If that promotion is upheld, what
would be its effect on the question of seniority and further whether any
person, senior to the appellants, who was promoted subsequent to the
promotion of the appellants, would regain his original seniority, are questions G
which cannot be decided by us in this appeal. However, as contended by Mr.
D.D. Thakur, we would definitely examine the validity of the order of promotion,
""""':
concerning the appellants, made by the State Government on 19th December,
1986 by relaxing the prescribed standard.

16. As pointed out above, the service conditions of all the H
172 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] I S.C.R.

A Stenographers, Senior Scale as also Junior Scale, are regulated by J&K
Secretariat (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1972. Rule 12 of these 't-•
Rules provides as under:-

"12. Residuary matters.-ln regard to matters not specifically covered
by these rules or by regulations or orders issued thereunder or by a
B special order, the members of the service shall be governed by the
rules, regulations and order applicable to the State Civil Service in
gereral."
I
17. Power to relax the Rules or any requirement thereof is not contained
in these Rules and, therefore, it become a "Residuary matter" within the
C meaning of Rule 12 above compelling us to look to other Rules applicable to
the State Civil Services in general.

18. Our attention has been drawn to the J&K Civil Service
(Decentralization of and Recruitment to Non-Gazetted Cadres) Rules, 1969,
D Specially Rule 1 (2) thereof, which is quoted below:-

"1. (!).........................................
(2) Unless otherwise expressly provided in any law for the time
being in force, these rules shall apply to all non-gazetted posts
under the Government except such posts in the Police
E Department."

19. These Rules are thus applicable to all the Non-Gazetted posts which
will obviously include the posts of Senior Scale Stenographers as the
applicability of these Rules has not been expressly excluded by the J&K
Secretariat (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 1972.
F
· 20. Rule 14 of the 1969 Rules provides as under :

"14. Power to issue instructions.-The Government may from time to
time, issue such directives or instructions, as may be necessary, for
the purpose of carrying out the provisions of these rules.
G
The Government may, where it is satisfied that the operation of
any provision of these rules causes undue hardship in any particular
case or class of cases, by order, dispense with or relax the requirements
of that rule as it may consider necessary."

H 21. This Rule gives specific power to the Government to relax the Rules
A.K. UPPAL v. STATE [S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J.] 173
in cases of undue hardship, either in a particular case or class of cases. A
22. The next question is whether the power to relax the Rules was
exercised by the Government for justifiable reasons or was it exercised
arbitrarily only to give appointment on higher posts to the appellants.

23. Our attention has been drawn to an affidavit dated 17. I 2.9 I filed in B
-~ · this appeal. The affidavit has been submitted by appellant No. I. A copy of
the Note of Secretary to the Government, General Department, submitted for
the consideration of the Chief Minister has been annexed with that affidavit.
This Noted reads as under:-

"350 ·· In the year 1984-85, there were 32 vacancies of Sr. Scale C
Stenographers available to be filled up. These vacancies were referred
to the erstwhile State Recruitment Board. The Board conducted the
test and recommended 31 candidates for their appointment in the
manner as indicated below :-

(a) Number of candidates having speed of 80 words per minute in D
Shorthand and 40, words per minute in Typing -6

(b) Number of Candidates having speed of 70 to 79 words. per
minute in Shorthand and 40 words per minute in Typing. -26

(35 I) Appointment orders in favour of six candidates at (a) above were E
issued in accordance with their inter-se merit. But the select list of 26
candidates at (b) above was not followed strictly in a.ccordance with
their inter-se merit as determined by the Board. The first five candidates,
who were topping in the merit list of 26 candidates were left out and
the candidates who were in lower merif and even failed in the test
were picked up and promoted as Sr. Scale Stenographers. This course F
of action was taken by amending retrospectively the existing
recruitment rules. The Recruitment Rules provide for appointment to
the cadre of Sr. Scale Stenographers on the basis of merit and
suitability to be determined by written test. This rule was changed
retrospectiv.ely to provi'de for appointment to Senior Scale G
Stenographers on the basis of seniority alone. This course of action
was taken when the panel of candidates approved by the Board was
available.

(352) The case has been examined by the General Department and
considering the matter in totality of the circumstances it is felt that H
174 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1998] 1 S.C.R.

A retrospective amendment of the rules has caused !J.ardship to the
candidates, who were having higher merit resulting in denial of
promotion to them in comparison to those, who have lesser merit but
promoted as Senior Scale Stenographers. These candidates have been
persistently making representations for redressal of their grievance
, and have even filed a writ petition, which is still pending. Five
B vacancies are at present available in the Secretariat. It would be fair,
if without disturbing the order issued in the past, the first five
candidates in merit are given appointment in relaxation of rules against
the available vacancies. Before issuing orders, they will be asked to
withdraw the writ
c (353) Chief Minister may be pleased to approve the appointment of
the aforementioned five candidates against the available posts.

24. The above Note clearly spells out a case of genuine hardship
inasmuch as the first five candidates, mentioned in the list of 26 candidates,
D were not promoted while candidates much lower in merit including even those ·'l.
who had filled in that test, were promoted as Senior Scale Stenographer.
These promotions were made by taking advantage of the retrospective
operation given to SRO 76 by SRO 177 with effect from 4.12.84 (date oftest).
It was also indicated in the Note that there were five vacancies available in
the Secretariat and on those vacancies, first five candidates, out of the list
E of 26 candidates, who were most meritorious, may be appointed in relaxation
of the hules as suggested by the State Recruitment Board. It was in these
circumstances that tl)e Chief Minister agreed with the suggestion and directed
that those five candidates, namely, the present appellants, may be promoted
as Senior Scale Stenographers in relaxation of the Rule.

F 25 We are, therefore, clearly of the opinion that it was a case in which
Government had not acted arbitrarily or capriciously but had proceeded to
relax ,the Rules to obviate genuine hardship caused to a class of employees,
namely, the appellants and directed their promotion in relaxation of the Rules.

G 26. Power to relax the Recruitment Rules or any other Rule made by the
State Government, under Article 309 of the Constitution of which the
corresponding provision is contained in Section 124 of the Constitution of
Jammu and Kashmir, is conferred upon the Government to meet any emergent
situation where injustice might have been caused or is likely to be caused to
any individual employee or class of employees or where the working of the
H Rule might have become impossible. Under service jurisprudence as also the
A.K. UPPAL v. STATE [S. SAGHIR AHMAD, J.) 175
Administrative Law, such a power has necessarily to be conceded to the A
•'{
employer particularly the State Government or the Central Government who
have to deal with the hundreds of employees working under them in different
departments including the Central or the State Secretariat.

27. In State of Maharashtra v. Jagannath Achyut Karandikar, AIR
..,. (1989) SC 1133 = (1989) 1SCR947 = (1989) Supp. 1SCC393, it was held as
under:-
B

"The power to relax the conditions of the rules to avoid undue hardship
in any case or class of cases cannot now be gainsaid. It would be, therefore;
futile for the respondents to make any grievance."
c
28. In JC. Yadav and others v. State of Haryana and others, [1990) 2
sec 189, it was held as under :-
"The relaxation of the rules may be to the extent the State Government
may consider necessary for dealing with a particular situation in a just
•"" and equitable manner. The scope of rule is wide enough to confer D
- power on the State Government to relax the requirement of rules in
respect of an individual or class of individuals to the extent it may
consider necessary for dealing with the case in a just and equitable
manner. The power of relaxation is generally contained in the Rules
with a view to mitigate undue hardship or to meet a particular situation. E
Many a time strict application of service rules create a situation where
a particular individual or a set of individuals may suffer undue hardship
and further there may be a situation where requisite qualified persons
may not be available for appointment to the service. In such a situation
the government has power to relax requirement of rules. The State
~ -1'-' Government may in exercise of its powers issue a general order relaxing F
any particular rule with a view to avail the services of requisite
officers. The relaxation even if granted in a general manner would
ensure to the benefit of individual officers."

29. This decision was followed in Sandeep Kumar Sharma v. State of
G
Punjab and others, (1997) 10 SCC 298. In which Hon'ble Punchhi, J. (as His
'"""\ Lordship then was), observed as under :-

"The power of relaxation even if generally included in the service
rules could either be for the purpose of mitigating hardships or to
meet special and deserving situations. Such rule must be construed H
176 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1998) I S.C.R.

A liberally, according to the learned Judges. Of course arbitrary exercise
of such power must be guarded against. But a narrow construction
is likely to deny benefit to the really deserving cases. We too are of
the view that the rule of relaxation must get a pragmatic construction
so as to achieve effective implementation of a good policy of the
Government."
B
30. In view of the above, the Government can exercise the power to
relax the Rules in all those cases in which hardship is caused in the
implementation of those Rules to meet a particular situation or where injustice
has been caused to either individual employee or class of employees. Of
C course, this power cannot be exercised capriciously or arbitrarily to give
undue advantage or favour to an individual employee.

31. Since power to relax the Rule was available to the Government and
since, on a scrutiny of facts of this case, we are satisfied that the power to
relax the standard prescribed for promotion to the post of Senior Scale
D Stenographer was properly exercised so that the appellants, who topped· the >.,
list of 26 candidates, recommended by the State Recruitment Board for
promotion by relaxing the Rules as they were nearest to the prescribed
standard, may be promoted to the posts on which persons who were far
below in merit, and even those who had failed in the test, had already been
E promoted as Senior Scale Stenographers, the order dated 19.12.86 by which
appell,ants were promoted has to be upheld as valid and properly passed by
the State Government.

32. The appeal is consequently allowed and the judgments of the
Single Judge as also of the Division Bench are set aside and Writ Petition NO.
F I 0 I of 1987 is dismissed with the observation that the appellants shall be
treated to have been promoted to the posts of Senior Scale Stenographers on
the basis of the order of the State Government dated 19.12.86. There will be
no order as to costs.

B.K.S. Appeal allowed.
G