Anil Saini S/O Shri Manna Ram Saini v. State of Rajasthan
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court clarified that a writ of mandamus under Article 226 is available only to enforce public duties imposed by statute, common law, or rules with the force of law, not mere contractual obligations. Dismissing petitions challenging writs issued by High Courts in favor of parties lacking legal rights as per Supreme Court precedents, the Court held the lower courts erred in enforcing non-subsisting rights. The judgment also addressed employment petitions, holding that contractual hires made without open advertisements are illegal backdoor entries, and thus, the principle preventing replacement of contractual employees does not apply, leading to the dismissal of their pleas for regularization or continuation of service.
What did the court decide?
The petitioner's application for enforcement of the High Court's writ is dismissed as the subject matter lacked a legal right. Pending writ petitions regarding contractual employees are dismissed as illegal backdoor entries prevent them from claiming continuation of service or regularization. The respondent was not entitled to mandamus for enforcement of a non-subsisting contractual right.