#Public Employment

The Court held that legislative validation cannot cure a recruitment process vitiated by systemic corruption and nepotism once a constitutional court has annulled it, as this would violate separation of powers. The 2022 Karnataka Act attempting to revive the 2011 Gazetted Probationers recruitment was struck down, with directions for fresh recruitment granting age relaxation to untainted candidates.

It quashed the rejection order against the petitioner and directed Coal India Limited to appoint him as an Accountant within four weeks. The decision clarifies that medical standards must tie directly to job functions to avoid arbitrary disqualification.

The Supreme Court ruled that Rule 10's 'special circumstances' cannot cure illegal deputation and subsequent absorption, overturning the High Court's sympathetic retention of four engineers with 18 years' service. Repatriation to the parent Development & Panchayat Department was ordered, affirming that prolonged service does not legitimize backdoor entry into public employment.

Allahabad HC rules compassionate appointment applications must be judged from the date of first filing, not subsequent reminders, setting aside rejection based on delay. The ruling clarifies that repeated representations do not reset the limitation period, protecting dependents' rights in government employment.

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that temporary employees who were within the prescribed age limit at the time of their initial appointment are entitled to age relaxation when applying for permanent posts, even if they exceed the upper age limit at the time of interview. This sets a critical precedent for thousands of contractual government workers across Rajasthan, ensuring that prior service tenure is not penalized by rigid age criteria during recruitment.

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that public sector employees are entitled to two maternity leaves under service rules, regardless of whether their first child was born before joining service. This clarifies a critical ambiguity in public employment benefits and affirms gender equity in administrative leave policies for female teachers and government staff.

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that an affidavit affirming marital status is legally sufficient for contractual service joining when the marriage certificate cannot be produced due to an ongoing matrimonial dispute, ensuring that procedural hurdles do not derail merit-based appointments. This sets a precedent for public employers to prioritize substantive proof over rigid documentation in cases involving genuine personal hardship.

The Bombay High Court held that once a recruitment process is initiated under existing service rules, subsequent amendments cannot be applied retroactively to cancel or alter the selection, protecting candidates' legitimate expectations. This reinforces the principle that public employment processes must remain stable and predictable, safeguarding applicants who have invested time and effort in good faith.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that delaying approval of a government appointment years after service began violates Article 14 and constitutes administrative arbitrariness. The court mandated immediate correction of the approval date to match the original appointment date and ordered payment of full salary arrears, reinforcing that procedural delays cannot deprive employees of rightful benefits.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed that employees with certified 40% permanent disability must have their transfer requests reconsidered under Clause 28 of the state’s transfer policy, even when administrative exigency is claimed. This ruling reinforces the duty to provide reasonable accommodation in public employment and sets a binding precedent for disability-sensitive administrative decisions across state departments.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that terminating a compassionate appointee for failing the CPC T exam violates proportionality and legitimate expectation. Authorities must explore suitable alternative Class III or IV posts where such certification is not mandatory, ensuring compassionate appointments retain their humanitarian purpose without punitive rigidity.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that suspension of agricultural cooperative service employees under Rule 32 cannot extend beyond one year, even if disciplinary proceedings remain pending. This binding limit reinforces procedural fairness in public employment and mandates immediate revocation of prolonged suspensions, affecting thousands of state-linked agricultural workers across MP.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that only documents explicitly listed in the 2007 Women and Child Development circular-ration card, Gram Panchayat voter list, and BPL list-can prove local residence for Aanganwadi worker appointments. Aadhaar, Samagra ID, and Voter ID, though widely accepted elsewhere, cannot substitute these statutorily mandated proofs, reinforcing strict compliance in public employment selection.

The Gauhati High Court ruled that a state’s prolonged, uninterrupted acceptance of an employee’s service-spanning over two decades-creates a legitimate expectation protected under Article 14, making it unconstitutional to later deny pension and salary benefits. This sets a critical precedent for public employees facing retroactive service challenges after decades of state recognition.

The Kerala High Court has ruled that administrative circulars lack the legal authority to impose financial penalties on government employees, affirming that only statutory Service Rules govern disciplinary actions. This decision protects public sector workers from arbitrary deductions and reinforces the hierarchy of legal norms in administrative discipline, impacting all state-run corporations and departments in Kerala.