amendment to RR

This judgment is only for the purpose that vested rights cannot be taken away by an amendment which is prospective in nature. But it does not prohibit action by amending the rules retrospectively. The judgment to fill up vacancies as per old rules is YV Rangiah case AIR 1983 SC and 1997 (10) SCC 419 Rajasthan Vs. Dayal. Another case would be MArripatti Nagaraja case which came in 2007-08 They are available in judis.nic.in / . supreme court kindly go through the same and make request to fill up the old vacancies as per old rules.

Dear Chandru ji Thanks a lot .we need to react often.I will try to fetch those judgement and if i couldn't may i disturb u again,Please?

I am afraid citations Mr Chanra is quoting relates to vacancies existing prior to amendment whereas what Mr Ami wants is application of old rules for future vacancies also in case of existing officials. Since it is not a vested right, I believe, as pointed out earlier, only option is to request the Department to insert such a provision in the rules itself.

If the rules are amended and if in the mean time promotions are not given, the judgment quoted by you cannot help but if promotions are given on the basis of unamended rules,the judgment is applicable,means even if the rules are amended the benefits given cannot be withdrawn.

The judgments quoted by me are for the proposition that " vacancies prior to amendment should be filled up as per unamended rules". there is no dispute on that. in service jurisprudence the promotions are governed  by the rules. in case  the rules are changed to disadvantage, the option is to request for relaxation or challenge the amended rules.

Dear Chandru ji can i have judgement of MArriapatti nagaraja case as i couldn't fetch out from the site that you indicated.But i got Rangaiah .Thank you-AMI