S.P. Chandrakar v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
Background
The appellant, an employee of the District Central Cooperative Bank, Raipur, was promoted to Additional Manager in 2010 after a rule (Niyam 5(3)(a) of the 1982 Service Rules) that barred employees from technical posts from being promoted to that administrative post was said to have been deleted via a departmental circular. A rival employee, whose promotion was affected, challenged this in a writ petition, arguing the circular was not a valid amendment to the statutory rule since it was never formally notified through the proper procedure. Thirteen years later, the Single Judge quashed the appellant's promotion, and the Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court affirmed that decision, reasoning that a mere administrative circular cannot override a statutory rule.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court's characterisation of the communication as a mere "circular" with no legal force, holding that the Registrar of Cooperative Societies had statutory power under the Chhattisgarh Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 to amend the rule, and that mislabeling or an imperfect form of the notification does not by itself invalidate a lawful exercise of that power, citing settled precedent that a wrong or unclear reference to the source of authority does not vitiate an action if it can be justified under some other valid power. Since the appellant's promotion was based on a valid exercise of the Registrar's power, there was no legal basis to set it aside, especially after such a long, undisturbed tenure in the post. The Court restored the appellant to his position with protected seniority, all consequential promotion benefits, and 50% back wages.
Lesson Learnt
A government or statutory authority's action is not automatically invalid merely because the document implementing it is loosely worded or labelled a "circular" rather than a formal order: what matters is whether the authority genuinely had the legal power to act, not the label used.