1. The practice to file review petition without any substantial error apperant on the face of record, that too; with change of counsel is not conductive to healthy practice of the bar, which has the responsibility to maintain the salutory practice of profession.

2. The scope of review is limited under the guise of review, the petitioner cannot be permitted to reagitate and reargue the case, which has already been addressed and decided.

3. Fiscal provisions must, where reasonably possible, be interpreted in a manner consistent with constitutional guarantees. A statutory condition, though couched in mandatory language, cannot be enforced where compliance is factually impossible or where the very premise on which the condition operates does not exist.

4. Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Sections 4(1), 5A, 6, 11 and 18 — Section 5A(1) objections lie only to acquisition of land; disputes limited to compensation, employment, rehabilitation or environmental safeguards fall outside its ambit and are to be addressed under Sections 11 and 18 — “Further inquiry” under Section 5A(2) is discretionary — Collateral or ancillary objections do not vitiate acquisition once possession is taken and projects are operational, and public purpose and legality must be challenged to attract Section 5A.

5. Pay scales and cadre hierarchies lie within the exclusive domain of policy-making, and the Courts ordinarily refrain from interfering with such matters. Judicial intervention becomes warranted only if it is demonstrably shown that the policy or decision is arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory in nature. Mere dissatisfaction with the structuring of pay or cadre levels does not justify judicial interference, as these are matters entrusted to the administrative and executive domain.

6. A candidate included in a validly prepared select panel does not obtain a vested right to appointment, but is entitled to due, fair, and lawful consideration for such appointment. The appointing authority cannot disregard the select panel or refuse appointment arbitrarily or on extraneous grounds. When a duly selected candidate stands in merit and a corresponding vacancy exists, appointment may be denied only for cogent and justifiable reasons. The Government’s unexplained inaction, coupled with its failure to furnish any reason for the delay or non-issuance of appointments, renders the decision arbitrary and legally unsustainable.

7. Sale of property on “as is where is” basis encumbrances, including statutory dues, pass to purchaser. Condition u/S 49 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 requiring a new owner to clear arrears of the previous owner before grant of electricity supply, as the same has statutory character and is binding on the purchaser.

8. Mere dissatisfaction with the authority’s decision, or a bare claim of parity, cannot by itself invoke the Court’s extraordinary jurisdiction. Unless the litigants establish infringement of a legal or vested right or demonstrate arbitrariness, discrimination, or any other constitutional infirmity in the decision-making process, the Court will not interfere. As judicial review is confined to examining the process and not the merits of the decision, absence of illegality, procedural lapse, unsustainable. or irrationality renders the challenge

9. An uncommunicated ACR, and even an ACR communicated at an inordinately delayed stage, cannot be taken into consideration for any adverse service consequence. The principles of natural justice mandate timely communication of all entries, particularly adverse remarks, so as to afford the employee a fair opportunity to represent and seek redress. Any performance assessment that is not duly and promptly conveyed loses its evidentiary value and cannot lawfully form the basis for denial of promotion, selection, or other service benefits.

10. No retrospective promotion or retrospective seniority can be granted from a date when the employee had not even been borne in the cadre. Such retrospective benefits, if conferred, would prejudicially affect the rights of validly appointed direct recruits in the interregnum and are, therefore, impermissible in law.