#Article 14 and 16

Gauhati HC rules that repeated appointments to a clan based on land ownership donations violate Articles 14 and 16, mandating open advertisement for public posts. The court directed age relaxation for the petitioner due to litigation delays, setting a precedent against hereditary public employment.

Madras HC dismisses claims of guest lecturers seeking regularization, reaffirming that public employment under Articles 14 and 16 mandates open competitive recruitment. The court directs the Teachers Recruitment Board to fill 4,000 Assistant Professor posts with experience weightage and age relaxation, but bars automatic regularization based on long service alone.

Allahabad HC holds that compassionate appointment is a one-time relief under constitutional exceptions (Articles 14 & 16). Accepting a lower-grade post bars subsequent claims for upgradation, even if the dependent later acquires higher qualifications or vacancies exist. The ruling reinforces finality in public employment relief mechanisms.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed a promotion order that bypassed a senior officer in favor of juniors, holding that the Departmental Promotion Committee violated the seniority cum merit principle enshrined under Articles 14 and 16. The ruling mandates a fresh DPC review with retrospective effect, ensuring that procedural fairness and constitutional equality govern public employment promotions.

CAT Cuttack rules that long-term casual workers in government institutions are entitled to regularization even if procedural requirements under the DoPT OM are not met, overriding the strict application of the Uma Devi doctrine. The ruling emphasizes substantive justice over technicalities, impacting thousands of similarly placed workers.

Jharkhand High Court directs filling of 2034 unfilled vacancies on merit and mandates independent fact-finding commission to address irregularities in recruitment.