Can't permit parties to take benefit of court order later set aside by higher court: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently held that no one can be permitted to take the benefit of orders that have subsequently been set aside by a higher court [Mekha Ram and Others v. State of Rajasthan and Others]..A Division Bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna noted that as per the settled position of law, no party should be prejudiced because of a court order."No one can be permitted to take the benefit of the wrong order passed by the court which has been subsequently set aside by the higher forum/court," the Bench observed. The top court was hearing an appeal assailing the order of the Rajasthan High Court that had held that the period spent on training courses by in-service candidates shall not be treated as a period on deputation.A Division Bench of the High Court, in quashing a single-judge's order, had directed the State to recover the excess amount paid to the appellants (the applicants of the training course) during their period of training as a period of leave permissible to them in easy equal installments.The present appellants challenged the same citing that the single-judge had granted a stay on recovery of alleged excess amount paid to the appellants. The top court responded to the submission by holding,"The restitution principle recognizes and gives shape to the idea that advantages secured by a litigant, on account of orders of court, at his behest, should not be perpetuated. In the case of Ouseph Mathai v. M. Abdul Khadir, reported in (2002) 1 SCC 319, it is observed and held that after the dismissal of the lis, the party concerned is relegated to the position which existed prior to the filing of the petition in the court which had granted the stay.".The Court, therefore, rejected the appeal, observing that the amount paid in excess has to be refunded and/or returned by the original writ petitioners.The State is entitled to apply the provisions of Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure that provides for restitution, the Bench observed..The Bench directed the State to recover the amount from the appellants in 36 easy equal installments, to be deducted from their salary from April 2022..Advocates-on-Record Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Laxmi Arvind and advocate RK Singh appeared on behalf of the appellants.Senior Advocate Manish Singhvi, Advocates-on-Record Ruchi Kohli, Rohit K Singh, Milind Kumar and advocate Arpit Parkash appeared on behalf of the respondents..[Read Judgment]