A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala on Monday dismissed petitions, asking the court to issue orders to complete the recruitment process to the Indian Army and Air Force, which was halted when the AGNIPATH scheme was announced in JUNE 2022. The petitions were also filed against the Delhi high court’s ruling which upheld the Agnipath scheme under which citizens of India between the age of 17 -23 were made eligible to apply to join the armed forces for four years.
The petitioners’ attorney, Arunava Mukherjee, stated right away that he is not challenging the scheme and that the issue is limited to the completion of the previously announced recruiting processes for the Army and Air Force. He said that the Union Government repeatedly postponed the exams stating the reason as COVID before abruptly announcing the Agnipath scheme in June. The exams for the Air Force were conducted, but the results were not made public, the attorney stated. He stressed that the exams were only postponed but never cancelled.
The supreme court dismissed the petition by pointing out that the candidates had no vested right to seek completion of the recruitment process. The bench also rejected the argument that the ‘doctrine of estoppel’ would be applicable and stated that it was not possible to characterize the decision to not proceed with the previous recruitment process as arbitrary. It was noted that when a larger public interest is involved promissory estoppel would not apply
According to CJI DY Chandrachud, “There is nothing for us to meddle in. It is an issue of public employment, not a contract.”
Representing the Union Government, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati was there informed the court that the Delhi High Court’s judgement covered each of these points in great length. “There were numerous problems during the COVID period; institutions had to deal with unknown circumstances at the time. It is not a pick-and-choose procedure. For the sake of national security and defence, we had to fill the positions, ASG said.
“The circumstances demanded that we modulate the recruitments in this way,” the ASG stated.
In another case, attorney Prashant Bhushan asserted that the petitioners were included in the Air Force’s provisional list after passing several test processes. After that, they continued to promise to send out appointment letters but kept delaying them for a year. Despite going through the full procedure, we were not hired. Consider the situation that these people are in. They have been patiently waiting for three years, Bhushan submitted. In these situations, he said, the law of “promissory estoppel” will come into play.
“Honestly. There is no vested right here, Mr Bhushan. According to the situation, it is not arbitrary, CJI Chandrachud stated. But the bench agreed to consider Bhushan’s case separately on April 17 after hearing his motion, while dismissing the other petition. (In which Mr Mukherjee appeared).
The bench further dismissed an appeal brought by Attorney ML Sharma against the Delhi High Court’s decision upholding the Agnipath initiative. Sharma’s major defence was that a Parliamentary statute was required since the plan could not have been introduced by executive order.
WRITTEN BY VAISHNAVI GOEL, 6TH SEMESTER, PUNJAB SCHOOL OF LAW, PUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA
