Vijay Kumar Arora v. The British India Corp Ltd And ANR
!
"# !$%&%"
'
() )
*+, +
))))! % %"
!- .!-&/&
+ 0 ) )
))))!&1"
!
&
.
*,
))))! % %"
!- .!-&/&
+ 0
))))!&1"
!
& ,'
2 0 ,) + + , 0
+ , 0
4- 56'
!
"# # $ # ## #
"&'
()*'+,,)
- 7!- + "# &
# ++-.++/ " 0
#0
) +,,) 2 '
0 $0 ) ',)'+,,) ##
0 ##
$ /
$8-"1 ) 5 #
" 6 7 80 %2# 0
#
+ " " # # 9 7
#
* :
; <0 &## ## # $
=-/ '"#8 0
"#
7 '!
=(=>=, 0
##
0 0# ? 0 #$# $#
) ##
+,,) #
## 0 - ? " #
,) , +,,)
0 # ) ,) +,,) 0 #
0 / ! $ # " ##0 $ ?A$# ?0
B
## $
0
9 2
# (
00 $ # # ## #0
00
?A$# "
!
%"
9!:
5# "# :!
1! % %"
!- = 6 # 0
## ##0# $
#
## $
, ! 0 $ "
#
# A ! $ $0 ## # 0
#
#
0 ## 0
$ 8 0
0 $ #0 # # :
+ "# # #
#
$
## $ ?0
# # $ $ # # #0# #
0# $ # ##
9!:
5# "# :!
-!&1"
!
&
) 6 # $# $0 8 0 # 9
=*/
#
0 #
0 0 ! 0 2 0
,1 313
8 :
* ! $
#
$ # # # #
$# 0 2 #
# # 0 ## $8
;
$0 # 8 $# : # # # #
"# # # #
# #
0 C #
## $ ?0
#
$
- 6# $ $# C # #0# : #$#
/
?
57&%&
( C
'" : 0 00
= !
A 0 )
2# $ ## ## #
# 0 0
# 0# #
### # : # )
"31. Superannuation: The services of any employee may be terminated on his attaining the age of superannuation on his reaching the age of 60 (sixty). The management may, however, waive this condition in exceptional cases, extending the age of superannuation in case of a particular workman by an order in writing for the number of years specified therein. The superannuated workman shall be entitled, on retiring from service, to receive gratuity at the rates specified below, and such dues shall be paid to the workman within fifteen days of his retirement."
+, $: 0 $# 0 #
# 9
=*/ $# ! ## # 2 #
$# $ 2 : ##
$ : # 2
0
$# C 6 # '" $0
#
+ $
# 2
2 '* $# :
0# $: :
+
#
$# 0 2 ## $8 # & # #
$:
( $ # $
#
2
++
0 :
05
0
0 8
# 8 # 0 2 $0 0 20
0 # $
! "
#
$ "8. A person may have a 'legitimate expectation' of being treated in a certain way by an administrative authority even though he has no legal right in private law to receive such treatment. The expectation may arise either from a representation or promise made by the authority, including an implied representation, or from consistent past practice. The doctrine of legitimate expectation has an important place in the developing law of judicial review. It is, however, not necessary to explore the doctrine in this case, it is enough merely to note that a legitimate expectation can provide a sufficient interest to enable one who cannot point to the existence of a substantive right to obtain the leave of the court to apply for judicial review. It is generally agreed that 'legitimate expectation' gives the applicant sufficient locus standi for judicial review and that the doctrine of legitimate expectation to be confined mostly to right of a fair hearing before a decision which results in negativing a promise or withdrawing an undertaking is taken. The doctrine does not
give scope to claim relief straightway from the administrative authorities as no crystallized right as such is involved. The protection of such legitimate expectation does not require the fulfilment of the expectation where an overriding public interest requires otherwise. In other words, where a person's legitimate expectation is not fulfilled by taking a particular decision then decision maker should justify the denial of such expectation by showing some overriding public interest."
# #0 2
# 0 ## 8
#0 6
0
0 #
# # 05 +) # # #
: # # # # #
#
#
# #
$ $0
@ ## #
$# # +* 0 $ $#0 $ ##0# $# "
$5/&%"
+4 00 # ##
,) , +,,)
$
<
$ C
# 0
00
2
## C# $ 0
+-
55"=! +/ ## #13
0# +/
# #
4+ , 06
() )
& 80.
D .; + & $# D .;