#service rules

The Madras HC held that maternity leave must be counted as part of qualifying service for promotion under the Tamil Nadu Revenue Subordinate Service Rules, directing authorities to grant the petitioner promotion with consequential benefits.

Uttarakhand High Court ruled that halting an ongoing promotion exercise to revise service rules is arbitrary and breaches the right to be considered for promotion under existing rules. The court ordered the promotion to proceed based on the service rules in force on 31 December 2020, protecting senior Group-B officers from ad-hoc rule changes.

The Delhi High Court ruled that the POSH Act does not replace an employer’s service rules and that a Voluntary Cessation of Service order cannot be invoked to retaliate against an employee who files a harassment complaint. This safeguards complainants’ job security and entitles them to back-wages and compensation.

A candidate recommended by a State Public Service Commission cannot claim an indefeasible right to appointment, as Rule 10 of the 1983 Service Rules makes the eligibility finding conclusive and bars any de novo review by the State. This limits State governments’ ability to reassess eligibility for registrar and similar posts.

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 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 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 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.

Allahabad HC rules that lecturers must exercise their one-time promotion option under AICTE’s 2020 clarifications within three years of notification. Delay beyond the deadline renders the application time-barred, reinforcing strict compliance with service rule timelines for public employment rights.

The ITAT Delhi has ruled that employees of Indian Institutes of Technology, even as autonomous bodies, qualify for tax-free leave encashment under Section 10(10AA) if governed by Central Government service rules. This clarifies that employer status alone cannot override statutory eligibility when service conditions align with central rules, impacting thousands of academic and technical staff across IITs and similar institutions.

Rajasthan High Court rules that Multipurpose Health Workers with 10 years of service are entitled to the Rs.950-1680 pay scale under the 1993 notification, even without formal training. The judgment reinforces service law protections for long-serving employees in government health services, setting a precedent for similar cases.

The Gauhati High Court has ruled that the appointment of Secretary to the Nagaland Legislative Assembly qualifies as a selection post under Rule 12 of the Service Rules, making it immune to Departmental Promotion Committee processes. This decision affirms the autonomy of constitutional appointments over routine promotion mechanisms, impacting how legislative secretariats across states structure senior appointments and bypass DPC norms.

Delhi High Court rules that disciplinary actions taken by an unauthorized body cannot be retrospectively validated, even via ratification by a higher authority. The judgment underscores that statutory service rules mandate prior delegation of disciplinary powers, impacting all public sector employees facing termination proceedings.

The Supreme Court has ruled that departmental enquiries are void if conducted without an oral hearing when the employee denies the charges, even when documentary evidence exists. This reinforces that procedural fairness under service rules cannot be substituted by paper-based proceedings, affecting all government and cooperative sector employees subject to disciplinary action.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that a government employee transferred to an autonomous institution retains pensionary benefits under the 2004 Rules, holding the State liable for dues. The judgment clarifies service continuity for employees transitioning from government to autonomous bodies, ensuring pension rights remain intact.