vil Appeal No 3212 of 1979 etc
From the Judgment and Order dated 2081979 of the Delhi High Court in Civil Writ Petition No 426 of 1978
PG NO 927 Rajinder Sachar GB Pai Narayan Shetty KT Anantharaman Mrs PS Shroff section Shroff Ms Girija Krishan CC Mathur AM Mittal DN Mishra Dalbir Bhandari Ms CK Sucharita and Ms A Subhashini for the appearing parties
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUTT J
Of these three appeals by special leave
we may first of all deal with Civil Appeal No 3214 of 1979 for
admittedly the disposal of that appeal will virtually mean the disposal of the other two appeals
The said Civil Appeal No 3214 of 1979 is directed against the judgment of the Delhi High Court whereby the High Court has quashed a circular dated March 8 1978 issued by the Board of Directors of Caltex Oil Refinery India Ltd for short CORIL a Government Company on the writ petition filed by the employees of CORIL being Writ Petition No 426 of 1978
The Caltex Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Refining India Ltd and of the undertakings in India of Caltex India Ltd Act 17 of 1977 hereinafter referred to as the Act  was enacted by the Union Parliament and came into force with effect from April Z3
the Act provides for the acquisition of shares of CORIL and for the acquisition and transfer of the right title and interest of Caltex India Ltd in relation to its Undertakings in India with a view to ensuring co ordinated distribution and utilisation of petroleum products
Under section 3 of the Act the share in the capital of the CORILS stood transferred to and vested in the Central Government On the appointed day being December 30 1976
Under section 5 the right
title and interest of Caltex India Ltd in relation to its Undertakings in India stood transferred to and vested in the Central Government on the appointed day
Section 9 of the Act provides that the Central Government may by a notification direct that the right title and interest and the liabilities of Caltex Inida Ltd in relation to any of its Undertakings in India shall instead of continuing to vest in the Central Government vest in the Government Company either on the date of the notification or on such earlier or later date not being a date earlier than the appointed day as may be specified in the notification
Section 112 provides that subject to rules made in this behalf under section 23 every whole time officer or other employee of CORIL would on the appointed day continue to be an officer or other PG NO 928 employee of CORIL on the same terms and conditions and with the same rights to pension gratuity and other matters as are admissible to him immediately before that day and shall continue to hold such office unless and until his employment under CORIL is duly terminated or until his remuneration and conditions of service are duly altered by that company
The Chairman of the Board of Directors of CORIL issued the impugned circular dated March 8 1978 inter alia stating therein that consequent upon the take over of the Caltex India Ltd by the Government the question of rationalisation of the perquisites and allowances admissible to Management Staff had been under consideration of the Board for sometime and that as an interim measure the Board had decided that the perquisites admissible to the Management Staff should be rationalised in the manner stated in the said circular
At this stage it may be mentioned that by the Caltex Oil Refinery India Ltd and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd Amalgamation Order 1978 which was published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary dated May 9 1978 the Undertaking of CORIL was transferred to and vested in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd which thus became a Government Company referred to in section 9 of the Act
After the issue of the said circular the respondent s Nos 1 to 4 who were some of the employees of CORIL filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court being Civil Writ Petition No 426 of 1978 challenging the legality and validity of the impugned order
It was submitted by the said respondents that under the said circular the terms and conditions of service of the employees of CORIL had been substantially and adversely altered to their prejudice
At the hearing of the said writ petition before the High Court it was contended on behalf of the respondents Nos
I to 4 that the notification issued under section 9 of the Act vesting the management of the Undertakings of Caltex India Ltd in CORIL was ultra vires subsection 1 of section 9
It was contended that the provision of subsection 1 of section 11 of the Act offended against the provisions of Articles 14 19 and 31 of the Constitution of India and as such it should be struck down
Further it was contended that there was no valid classification between the contracts referred to in section 111 and Section 15 of the Act
It was urged that unguided and arbitrary powers had been vested in the of official by sub section 1 of section 11 for the PG NO 929 alteration of the terms and conditions of service of the employees
Besides the above contentions another contention was advanced on behalf of the respondents Nos 1 and 4 namely that the employees not having been given an opportunity of being heard before altering to their prejudice the terms and conditions of service the impugned circular should be struck down as void being opposed to the principles of natural justice
All the contentions except the last contention of the respondents Nos 1 to 4 were rejected by the High Court
The High Court however took the view that as no opportunity was given to the employees of CORIL before the impugned circular was issued the Board of Directors of CORIL acted illegally and in violation of the principles of natural justice
In that view of the matter the High Court quashed the impugned circular
Hence this appeal by special leave
It is not disputed that the employees were not given any opportunity of being heard before the impugned circular dated March 8 1978 was issued
It is however submitted by Mr Pai learned Counsel appearing on behalf of CORIL that there has been no prejudicial alteration of the terms and conditions of service of the employees of CORIL by the impugned circular
It is urged that nothing has been pleaded by the respondents Nos 1 to 4 as to which clauses of the impugned circular are to their detriment
The High Court has also not pointed out such clauses before quashing the impugned circular
It appears that for the first time before us such a contention is advanced on behalf of CORIL
In this connection we may refer to an observation of the High Court Which is Admittedly the impugned order adversely affects the perquisites of the petitioners
It has resulted in civil consequence
The above observation clearly indicates that it was admitted by the parties that the impugned circular had adversely affected the terms and conditions of service of the respondents Nos 1 to 4 who were the petitioners in the writ petition before the High Court
Mr Sachhar learned Counsel appearing on behalf on the respondents spondents Nos 1 to 4 has handed over to us a copy of the writ petition filed by the respondents Nos 1 to 4 before the High Court being Civil Writ Petition No 426 of 1978
In paragraph 12 of the writ petition it has been inter alia stated as tollows The petitioners respectfully submit that under the said circular the terms and conditions of service of the employees of the second respondent including the petitioners herein have been substantially and adversely altered to the PG NO 930 prejudice of such employees
The same would be clear inter alia from the statements annexed hereto and marked as Annexure IV
 Annexure IV is a statement of Annual Loss in Remuneration Income per personemployee posted at Delhi and UP Nothing has been produced before us on behalf of CORIL or the Union of India to show that the statements contained in Annexure IV are untrue
In the circumstances there is no substance in the contention made by Mr Pai that there has been no prejudicial alteration of the terms and conditions of service of the employees of CORIL and that nothing has been pleaded by the respondents Nos 1 to 4 as to which clauses of the impugned circular are to their detriment
On of the contentions that was urged by the respondents Nos1 to 4 before the High Court at the hearing of the writ petition as noticed above is that unguided and arbitrary powers have been vested in the official by sub section 1 of section 11 for the alteration of the terms and conditions of service of the employees
It has been observed by the High Court that although the terms and conditions of service could be altered by CORIL but such alteration has to be made duly  as provided in sub section 2 of section 11 of the Act
The High Court has placed reliance upon the ordinary dictionary meaning of the word duly  which
according to Concise Oxford Dictionary means rightly properly fitly  and according to Stroud s Judicial Dictionary Fourth Edition the word duly means done in due course and according to law 
In our opinion the word duly  is very significant and excludes any arbitrary exercise of power under section 112
It is now well established principle of law that there can be no deprivation or curtailment of any existing right advantage or benefit enjoyed by a Government servant without complying with the rules of natural justice by giving the Government servant concerned an opportunity of being heard
Any arbitrary or whimsical exercise of power prejudicially affecting the existing conditions of service of a Government servant will offend against the provision of Article of the Constitution Admittedly the employees of CORIL were not given an opportunity of hearing or representing their case before the impugned circular was issued by the Board of Directors
The impugned circular was therefore be sustained as it Offends against the rules of natural justice
It is however contended on behalf of CORIL that after the impugned circular was issued an opportunity of hearing was given to the employees with regard to the alterations made in the conditions of their service by the impugned PG NO 931 circular
In our opinion the post decisional opportunity of hearing does not subserve the rules of natural justice
The authority who embarks upon a post decisional hearing will naturally proceed with a closed mind and there is hardly any chance of getting a proper consideration of the representation at such a post decisional opportunity
In this connection we may refer to a recent decision of this Court in KI Shephard  Ors
vs Union of India  Ors JT 1987 3 600
What happened in that case was that the Hindustan Commercial Bank The Bank of Cochin Ltd and Lakshmi Commercial Bank which were private Banks were amalgamated with Punjab National Bank Canara Bank and State Bank of India respectively in terms of separate schemes drawn under section 45 of the Banking Regulation Act 1949
Pursuant to the schemes certain employees of the first mentioned three Banks were excluded from employment and their services were not taken over by the respective transferee Banks
Such exclusion was made without giving the employees whose services were terminated an opportunity of being heard
Ranganath Misra J speaking for the Court observed as follows We may now point out that the learned Single Judge of the Kerala High Court had proposed a post amalgamation hearing to meet the situation but that has been vacated by the Division Bench
For the reasons we have indicated there is no justification to think of a post decisional hearing
On the other hand the normal rule should apply
It was also contended on behalf of the respondents that the excluded employees could now represent and their case could be examined
We do not think that would meet the ends of justice
They have already been thrown our of employment and having been deprived of livelihood they must be facing serious difficulties
I here is no justification to throw them out of employment and then given them an opportunity of representation when the requirement is that they should have the opportunity referred to above as a condition precedent to action
It is common experience that once a decision has been taken
there is a tendency to uphold it and a representation may not really yield any fruitful purpose
 The view that has been taken by this Court in the above observation is that once a decision has been taken there is a tendency to uphold it and a representation may not yield any fruitful purpose
PG NO 932 Thus even if any hearing was given to the employees of CORIL after the issuance of the impugned circular that would not be any compliance with the rules of natural justice or avoid the mischief of arbitrariness as contemplated by Article 14 of the Constitution
The High Court
In our opinion was perfectly justified in quashing the impugned circular 
In the result Civil appeal No 3214 of 1979 is dismissed
In view of the reasons given in Civil Appeal No 3214 of 1979 Civil Appeal No 3518 of 1979 is also dismissed
Civil Appeal No 3212 of 1979 has been preferred by the writ petitioners in civil Writ Petition No 426 of 1978 filed before the High Court
The writ petitioners succeded in getting the impugned circular quashed by the High Court
As the High Court rejected some of the grounds of challenge to the impugned circular the appeal has been preferred
There is no merit in this appeal and it is wholly misconceived
The appeal is therefore dismissed
There will be no order as to costs in any of these appeals
MLA Appeal dismissed


Summary:
Medical Colleges Admission to All India Entrance Examination for MBBSBDS course Vacant seats as a result of drop out in number of candidates allocated seats Guidelines issued by Court for allocation of vacant seats
The petitioners in the writ petitions had been allotted seats in MBBSBDS courses in various MedicalDental Colleges
They sought change and wanted admissions in colleges which were near their home towns
The Union of India respondent in the writ petitions also filed Civil Miscellaneous Petitions seeking directions of the Court in the matter of the allocation of 532 vacant seats in the medical colleges in the MBBSBDS courses pursuant to the result of the All India Entrance Examination conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education New Delhi
Disposing of the Writ and Civil Miscellaneous petitions the Court laid down guidelines to be followed HELD 1
The candidates who have been allocated seats to the Dhanbad Medical College which is not a recognised College by the Medical Council of India should first be reallocated to the recognised medical colleges having vacancies keeping in view the minimum distance from their home towns
907H908A 2
Those candidates who have exercised their choice for MBBS course only or to MBBS course by way of first preference and to BDS course by way of second preference and admitted to BDS Course for want of seats in the MBBS Course shall if they or any of them desire to be admitted in the MBBS Course be absorbed against the available vacant seats in order of merit
908B C PG NO 905 PG NO 906 3
The vacant MBBS or BDS seats thereafter available should be offered to the candidates on the waiting list in order of merits
908C 4
The candidates will be given maximum time of twenty days to join the medical colleges failing with the seats will be declared vacant
908F 5
The allocation of MBBs seats already made shall not be disturbed
908F 6
The Director General of Health Services shall consider the question of allotment to candidates who have been already admitted to MBBS or BDS Course nearer to their home town in order of merit
908G The Director General of Health Services to deal with the cases of the petitioners in the different writ petitions and also the cases of the other candidates in accordance with the above guidelines and dispose of the same within a period of three weaks 910B