SLP and Its Dismissal

*Service Law : Requirement of A Certificate*

It is not necessary that the certificate for a particular year is mandatory to claim reservation benefit when the candidate continues to be in same reserved category in later years. Once a fact to that aspect has been established that a candidate belongs to the reserved category, then the Employer is under a bounden duty to grant such benefit to a person who belongs to that category without going into the technicalities of issuance of a certificate for a particular year more so when there is no stipulation/condition mentioned in the advertisement. - Narendra Pandel v. Union of India [2024] GCtR 3430 (Jodhpur, Rajasthan)

Interpreting Article 136 of Constitution, it can be said that in case of dismissal of an SLP in limine by a non- speaking order does not culminate in merger of the impugned decision and does not constitute res judicata. The exercise of jurisdiction conferred on this Court by Article 136 of the Constitution consists of two steps : (i) granting special leave to appeal; and (ii) hearing the appeal. This distinction is clearly demonstrated by the provisions of Order XVI of the Supreme Court Rules framed in exercise of the power conferred by Article 145 of the Constitution. While hearing the petition for special leave to appeal, the Court is called upon to see whether the petitioner should be granted such leave or not. While hearing such petition, the Court is not exercising its appellate jurisdiction; it is merely exercising its discretionary jurisdiction to grant or not to grant leave to appeal. The petitioner is still outside the gate of entry though aspiring to enter the appellate arena of Supreme Court. Whether he enters or not would depend on the fate of his petition for special leave.  The effect of a non-speaking order of dismissal of a special leave petition, without anything more indicating the grounds or reasons of its dismissal must, by necessary implication, be taken to be that this Court had decided only that it was not a fit case where special leave should be granted. This conclusion may have been reached by this Court due to several reasons. When the order passed by this Court was not a speaking one, it is not correct to assume that this Court had necessarily decided implicitly all the questions in relation to the merits of the award, which was under challenge before this Court in the special leave petition. A writ proceeding is a wholly different and distinct proceeding.- Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala [2000] GCtR 3230 (SC)