State of U.P. v. Vikash Kumar Singh
Background
Several Superintending Engineers in Uttar Pradesh's irrigation department claimed promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, but they had not completed the mandatory 25 years of service required under the relevant service rules, so their names were repeatedly left out of successive eligibility lists between 2018 and 2019. They challenged this before the Allahabad High Court, which held that they were entitled to a relaxation of the service requirement under a separate 2006 Relaxation Rules and ordered the State to include them in the eligibility list; the Division Bench upheld this. The State of U.P. appealed to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that the Relaxation Rules used the word "may," making the grant of relaxation a matter of administrative discretion rather than an enforceable right, so the High Court could not have issued a writ of mandamus compelling the State to grant it. Since the employees admittedly lacked the required 25 years of service under the primary promotion rules, their exclusion from the eligibility lists was valid and lawful. The Court therefore quashed the High Court's judgments and restored the original eligibility lists, allowing the State's appeal.
Lesson Learnt
When a service rule grants a benefit using permissive language like "may," it creates discretion for the authority, not an automatic entitlement, and courts cannot direct an authority to exercise that discretion in a particular way through a writ of mandamus.