
In News
- The Supreme Court recently dismissed petitions challenging the Delhi High Court judgment which upheld the Agnipath scheme for recruitment to the armed forces.
More about the news
- The petition:
- The Delhi High Court judgment recently upheld the Agnipath scheme for recruitment to the armed forces.
- The petitioners were challenging this judgment.
- Issue:
- Some of the petitioners included candidates who were shortlisted in the earlier recruitment process to Army and Air Force.
- Their names appeared in a provisional list for recruitment to Air Force but the recruitment process was cancelled when Agnipath scheme was notified.
- There was a written exam, physical test, medical exam conducted under the old recruitment process after which a provisional selection list was published with the ranks.
- These candidates had got jobs in BSF and other paramilitary organisations, but had refused as they were told that Air Force recruitment letters will be issued.
- So the petitioners argued that the government must be directed to complete the old process citing the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
Doctrine of promissory estoppel
- What is the doctrine?
- Promissory estoppel is a concept developed in contractual laws.
- A valid contract under law requires an agreement to be made with sufficient consideration.
- Significance:
- A claim of doctrine of promissory estoppel essentially prevents a “promisor” from backing out of an agreement on the grounds that there is no “consideration.”
- How?
- The doctrine is invoked in court by a plaintiff (the party moving court in a civil action) against the defendant to ensure execution of a contract or seek compensation for failure to perform the contract.
- Checklist for application:
- In a 1981 decision in Chhaganlal Keshavlal Mehta v. Patel Narandas Haribhai, the SC lists out a checklist for when the doctrine can be applied.
- First, there must be a clear and unambiguous promise.
- Second, the plaintiff must have acted relying reasonably on that promise.
- Third, the plaintiff must have suffered a loss.
- In a 1981 decision in Chhaganlal Keshavlal Mehta v. Patel Narandas Haribhai, the SC lists out a checklist for when the doctrine can be applied.
SC’s decision on the issue
- The judges have refused this argument pointing out that “promissory estoppel is always subject to overarching public interest”.
- They also added that “this is not a contract matter where promissory estoppel in public law was applied, it is a public employment”.
About the Agnipath Recruitment Scheme
|
Source: TH