#administrative justice

CAT Ernakulam rules that employees provisionally appointed and later invalidated must be restored to their original GDS position with all benefits, including pension and service continuity, up to the age of 65. The judgment reinforces that service rendered under provisional appointments cannot be retrospectively nullified, ensuring statutory protection for retired employees.

CAT remanded a KVS transfer order, ruling that serious medical conditions like Crohn’s disease and TB must be empathetically considered even if not explicitly listed in the policy. The tribunal emphasized administrative justice requires weighing individual hardships beyond rigid policy exclusions, impacting service law and employment rights.

MP High Court quashes a 13-year-old departmental charge sheet, holding that inordinate delay, superannuation of inquiry officers, and lack of procedural progress violate principles of natural justice. The ruling reinforces that pending disciplinary actions cannot linger indefinitely, especially post-retirement, and sets a precedent for administrative accountability in service law.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that daily wage service can be counted as pensionable service under the Pension Rules, 1979, but only if the initial appointment strictly adhered to the Recruitment Rules of 1977. This clarifies a critical threshold for thousands of informal workers seeking pension benefits, making procedural compliance - not just length of service - the decisive factor.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that a Patwari with over 30 years of service is entitled to the third time-bound pay scale under state circulars, affirming legitimate expectation and binding precedent from prior rulings. This decision mandates prompt adjudication of such claims and sets a clear standard for equitable pay progression in state-level revenue service roles.

Bombay High Court rules that candidates cannot be penalized for exceeding the age limit in public recruitment due to the state's administrative delay. The court directed Maharashtra to accept applications for Additional Public Prosecutor posts, emphasizing equitable relief under natural justice principles. This sets a precedent for similar cases involving government recruitment delays.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the one-month statutory deadline under Section 39(3) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act is absolute and non-negotiable, rejecting any request for extension. This sets a binding precedent for all rural administrative appeals in Maharashtra, ensuring timely justice and curbing executive delay in panchayat governance.

CAT Principal Bench holds that an 11-year delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings against an ICAS officer is justified by an ongoing CBI investigation, dismissing the petition to quash the charge memo. The ruling reinforces that investigative complexities can excuse procedural delays, impacting government employees facing disciplinary actions.

Calcutta High Court ruled that prolonged tribunal delays violate the right to speedy justice under Article 21, especially for elderly litigants. The court directed the West Bengal Land Reforms Tribunal to dispose of a 2023 case within six months, emphasizing that complete records and advanced age necessitate expedited proceedings.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that state circulars granting time-bound pay scales after 10, 20, and 30 years of service create enforceable legitimate expectations. The court directs authorities to decide a Patwari’s claim for the third increment within three months, reinforcing that administrative promises must be honored under Article 14.

Bombay High Court directs authorities to keep one post vacant after petitioner's termination over caste certificate invalidation, pending reconsideration of caste claim.

The Meghalaya High Court mandates separation of judicial and executive functions in Garo Hills Autonomous District Council, upholding Sixth Schedule and 1953 Rules.

Madras High Court holds that revenue authorities must adjudicate land record correction requests on merits after hearing affected parties, not dismiss them summarily.