Supreme Court Annual Digest 2023 - Service Law


17 Jan 2024 12:15 PM GMT

  • Supreme Court Annual Digest 2023 - Service Law

    28 years after applying, a man got a job in the postal dept at 50 years of age due to the Supreme Court's Order. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882A person cannot be deemed to be in service when the first dismissal order is in force. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 42Absorption - The appellant's claim for absorption as Assistant Teacher in the Higher Secondary Section is not tenable. It observed that the appellant...

    28 years after applying, a man got a job in the postal dept at 50 years of age due to the Supreme Court's Order. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882

    A person cannot be deemed to be in service when the first dismissal order is in force. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 42

    Absorption - The appellant's claim for absorption as Assistant Teacher in the Higher Secondary Section is not tenable. It observed that the appellant was appointed as a substitute teacher in the pay scale of a primary teacher. In fact, when he filed the first round of proceedings, no plea was raised that he worked as an Assistant Teacher in the Higher Secondary Section. Even before the Tribunal, the argument was only about regularization. Before this Court too, no claim for regularization as Assistant Teacher in the Higher Secondary Section was made. The Screening Committee having considered him, pursuant to the orders of this Court, had thought it fit to absorb him only as a primary teacher; the Screening Committee itself was pursuant to the orders of this Court; the records of his appointment as a substitute teacher admittedly show that he was only appointed as a substitute primary teacher; it is on the completion of three months as substitute primary teacher that he acquired temporary status and on absorption now he became entitled to certain benefits. (Para 29 - 32) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 806

    Accused of a heinous offense cannot claim the right to appointment when the acquittal was on the 'benefit of doubt'. (Para 19) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 810

    Acquittal in the criminal case - Even though the respondent had truthfully declared that he was involved in a criminal case, on perusing the facts of the said case and the observations made in the judgement, quite clearly, this was not a case of clean acquittal. It is evident from the facts narrated that after the chargesheet was filed, the respondent had arrived at a compromise with the complainant and filed an application under Section 320 of the CrPC, based on which the offence under Section 341 IPC was compounded. As for the remaining offences for which the respondent was charged i.e. Section 354(D) of the IPC and Section 11 (D)/12 of the POCSO Act, they were non compoundable and therefore, the matter was taken to trial. The respondent was acquitted by the trial Court primarily on account of the fact that the complainant did not support the case set up by the prosecution and the other prosecution witnesses had turned hostile. In such circumstances, the respondent's plea that he had been given a clean acquittal in the criminal case, is found to be devoid of merits. (Para 16 & 17) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 810

    Acquittal in the criminal case - mere acquittal of the respondent in the criminal case would not automatically entitle him to being declared fit for appointment to the subject post. The State Government has judiciously exercised its discretion after taking note of all the relevant factors 2 relating to the antecedents of the respondent. In such a case, even one criminal case faced by the respondent in which he was ultimately acquitted, apparently on the basis of being extended benefit of doubt, can make him unsuitable for appointment to the post of a Constable. The said decision taken by the State Government is not tainted by any malafides or arbitrariness for the High Court to have interfered therewith. As a result, the judgement passed by the Single Judge is upheld while quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The appeal is allowed. (Para 19) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 810

    Act of regularizing the services of only some employees and not of other entitled employees, is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax had found 65 employees entitled to regularization of employment but only 35 could be regularized, since only 35 posts were available. The Income Tax Department to regularize the services of the remaining entitled employees, from the date on which the services of other 35 employees were regularized, and to pay the back wages and other consequential benefits within a period of six months. (Para 8 & 13) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 520

    Allopathy doctors and doctors of indigenous medicine cannot be said to be performing “equal work” so as to be entitled to “equal pay”. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 350

    Applicant does not acquire any indefeasible right to be appointed just because he/she has qualified in the selection process. (Para 17) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 812

    Appointment cannot be denied citing suppression of material facts when the employer's query was vague in nature. (Para 14) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 714

    Appointment in Law Enforcement Agency - The yardstick to be applied in cases where the appointment sought relates to a Law Enforcement Agency, ought to be much more stringent than those applied to a routine vacancy. One must be mindful of the fact that once appointed to such a post, a responsibility would be cast on the respondent of maintaining law and order in the society, enforcing the law, dealing with arms and ammunitions, apprehending suspected criminals and protecting the life and property of the public at large. Therefore, the standard of rectitude to be applied to any person seeking appointment in a Law Enforcement Agency must always be higher and more rigourous for the simple reason that possession of a higher moral conduct is one of the basic requirements for appointment to a post as sensitive as that in the police service. (Para 18) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 810

    Appointment order of petitioner as constable of police cancelled as it was found that the the petitioner was involved in a criminal case and was under arrest for four days and he consciously concealed the said information - Mere acquittal does not entitle an employee to the reinstatement in service - If a person is acquitted or discharged, it cannot obviously be inferred that he was falsely involved, or he had no criminal antecedents - Director General being the highest functionary in the police hierarchy, was the best judge to consider the suitability of the petitioner for induction into the police force. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 150

    Appointments cannot be made over and above the vacancies which have been advertised, except in an emergency situation or for some unforeseen reasons, in public interest or when a policy decision is taken by the State Government in this regard. (Para 21) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997

    Appointments cannot be made over and above the vacancies which were advertised i.e., clear and anticipated vacancies, even though the Public Service Commission may have prepared a longer merit list than it was required to do. (Para 23) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997

    Appointments only on advertised vacancies': Supreme Court holds 2 judges to be wrongly appointed; refuses to unseat them noting 10 yrs service. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997

    As the respondent was not involved in heinous/serious offence or any offence involving moral turpitude, and the fact that in the said criminal case he has been honourably acquitted, therefore, modifying the order of the High Court, we direct the appellant to consider the case of the respondent and issue order of appointment to the post of constable in West Bengal Police Force within a period of four weeks from the date of passing of this order. (Para 15) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 714

    Belated service-related claim will be rejected on the ground of delay and laches (where remedy is sought by filing a writ petition) or limitation (where remedy is sought by an application to the Administrative Tribunal). (Para 21) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883

    CCS Pension Rules, 1972; Rule 2(g) and 17 - Past service as a contractual employee is to be taken into account for pension. (Para 9) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 662

    CCS Pension Rules; Rule 26 (2) - Unauthorized resignation from government service for another government job will result in the forfeiture of past service and pension benefits. (Para 17) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 807

    Central Civil Service Rules - Retired employee can be appointed as inquiry authority in disciplinary proceedings. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 609

    Challenge to selection process - The criteria for evaluation of a candidate's performance in an interview may be diverse and some of it may be subjective. However, having submitted to the interview process with no demur or protest, the same cannot be challenged subsequently simply because the candidate's personal evaluation of his performance was higher than the marks awarded by the panel - Simply because the result of the selection process is not palatable to a candidate, he cannot allege that the process of interview was unfair or that there was some lacuna in the process. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 253

    Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1955 (Bihar) - Rejection of candidates for not producing original certificates – Held, if a person possesses eligibility before the date of actual selection, he cannot be denied benefit because its proof is produced later. In the present case, the proof is available and true photocopies were on record. The appellants' candidature could not have been rejected merely because the original was not produced before the Commission at the time of interview in particular when such requirement was not mandatory, in view of the manner in which the Rules are couched. (Para 18 & 19) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 818

    Civil Service Regulations (Jammu & Kashmir); Article 77D - Benefit of Pay Protection - Only exception carved out to Article 77D was in respect of a government servant holding a post on ad-hoc basis or working against leave/suspension or any other short-term vacancy. There is a difference between a tenure post and an appointment made on a regular post on a tenure basis. The appointment to the post of Lecturer at Academic Staff College was not against a short-term vacancy as it was a substantive post on a tenure basis and hence the exception under the third proviso to Article 77D will not apply. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to pay protection. (Para 10) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 649

    Civil Service Rules (Karnataka); Rule 20 Note 4 - As per the language of the said Rule, the lien of a government servant on the previous post stands protected till his or her continuation on probation period on the new post. The intention of the said rule is clear, viz., to protect the past service of the government servant in cases where the government servant is not confirmed or absorbed substantively on the new post on account of his/her failure to satisfactorily complete the probation period or for any other reason. (Para 19) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 748

    Civil Service Rules (Karnataka); Rule 252(b) - 'Relieving order' cannot be treated as resignation. The said Rule makes it clear that if another appointment is taken up by a government servant with proper permission, then it cannot be termed as resignation of public service. (Para 20) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 748

    Communicating annual confidential report to employee without sufficient time to challenge it same as non-communication of report. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 139

    Compassionate Appointment - Delay on the part of the authorities of the State to decide claims for compassionate appointment would no doubt frustrate the very object of a scheme of compassionate appointment. Government officials are to act with a sense of utmost proactiveness and immediacy while deciding claims of compassionate appointment so as to ensure that the wholesome object of such a scheme is fulfilled. (Para 14) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 175

    Compassionate Appointment - Principles summarized. (Para 7.2) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 175

    Compassionate Appointment - Since compassionate appointment is not a vested right and the same is relative to the financial condition and hardship faced by the dependents of the deceased government employee as a consequence of his death, a claim for compassionate appointment may not be entertained after lapse of a considerable period of time since the death of the government employee. (Para 7.5) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 175

    Compulsory retirement order can be set aside if it's found to be punitive & was passed to circumvent disciplinary proceedings. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 165

    Date of Birth - Any request for alternation of date of birth cannot be made after a long delay and especially towards the end of the career of an employee - Employees cannot wake up from their slumber after a long time and seek alteration of date of birth towards the fag end of their career. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 124

    Delay and laches, vital in service matters, can be seen as acquiescence. (Para 20) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 883

    Departmental Proceedings - Acquittal - The nature of proceedings being wholly separate and distinct, acquittal in criminal proceedings does not entitle the delinquent employee for any benefit in the latter or automatic discharge in departmental proceedings. (Para 29.2) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 850

    Difference in pay-scale based on academic qualifications is valid even if the nature of work is the same. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 35

    Different pay scale for seemingly similar posts are justifiable if there is a reasonable classification. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 129

    Disciplinary Action - Power of judicial review for the Courts in disciplinary action is circumscribed. The Court can only correct errors of law or procedural errors leading to manifest injustice or violation of principles of natural justice and the power exercised is not akin to adjudication of the case on merits as an appellate authority. (Para 9) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 733

    Disciplinary proceedings contemplated': what does 'contemplate' mean? Supreme Court explains. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1065

    Dismissed from Service - Matter stood closed in the year 2004 - The review petition was also dismissed - The petitioner has not filed a curative petition but has filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India claiming that injustice has been done to him and the matter should be reopened - No legal system can have a scenario where a person keeps on raking up the issue again and again once it is resolved at highest level. This is complete wastage of judicial time. The writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/-, though we limit the amount of costs considering the petitioner is a dismissed person, to be deposited with the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Welfare Fund to be utilized for the SCBA library. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 439

    Distinction between simpliciter termination and punitive termination - This distinction is crucial since if the order of termination is punitive or stigmatic in nature, it becomes mandatory to conduct an inquiry following the procedure and an opportunity to be heard has to be given. Failure to do so may make such termination/discharge illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice. If an enquiry or assessment is conducted with the aim of uncovering any misconduct by an employee and results in their termination, it is considered punitive in nature. Whereas, if it is focused on evaluating an employee's suitability for a specific job, the termination is considered termination simpliciter and not punitive. (Para 13) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 761

    Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation does not have any role to play in matters that are strictly governed by the Service Regulations. (Para 18, 19) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 710

    Educational qualification can be a ground for different pay scale even if the nature of duties are the same - Pay scale difference in the posts of Nursing Assistant and Staff Nurse in Border Security Force upheld - Nature of work may be more or less the same but the scale of pay may vary based on academic qualification or experience which justifies classification. (Paras 4.4, 5) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 35

    Employee can't seek alteration of date of birth at fag end of career. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 124

    Employer has the discretion to terminate or condone an omission in the disclosure made by a candidate. While doing so, the employer must act with prudence, keep in mind the nature of the post and the duties required to be discharged. Higher the post, more stringent ought to be the standards to be applied. Even if a truthful disclosure has been made, the employer is well within its right to examine the fitness of a candidate and in a concluded criminal case, keep in mind the nature of the offence and verify whether the acquittal is honourable or benefit has been extended on technical reasons. If the employer arrives at a conclusion that the incumbent is of a suspect character or unfit for the post, he may not be appointed or continued in service. (Para 10) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 810

    Employer, if it is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, would have no authority to act in an arbitrary manner and throw the candidate out from the range of appointment, as distinguished from the zone of consideration, without rhyme or reason. The employer-State being bound by Article 14 of the Constitution, the law places an obligation, nay duty, on such an employer to provide some justification by way of reason. (Para 15) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882

    Equal Pay for Equal Work - It may be true that the nature of work involved in two posts may sometimes appear to be more or less similar, however, if the classification of posts and determination of pay scale have reasonable nexus with the objective or purpose sought to be achieved, namely, the efficiency in the administration, the Pay Commissions would be justified in recommending and the State would be justified in prescribing different pay scales for the seemingly similar posts. A higher pay scale to avoid stagnation or resultant frustration for lack of promotional avenues or frustration due to longer duration of promotional avenues is also an acceptable reason for pay differentiation. It is also a well-accepted position that there could be more than one grade in a particular service. The classification of posts and the determination of pay structure, thus falls within the exclusive domain of the Executive, and the Courts or Tribunals cannot sit in appeal over the wisdom of the Executive in prescribing certain pay structure and grade in a particular service. (Para 14) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 129

    Equal Pay for Equal Work - The doctrine “equal pay for equal work” is not an abstract doctrine and is capable of being enforced in a Court of Law, the equal pay must be for equal work of equal value. The equation of posts and determination of pay scales is the primary function of the Executive and not of the Judiciary. The Courts therefore should not enter upon the task of job evaluation which is generally left to the expert bodies like the Pay Commissions. (Para 14) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 129

    Even if the Court passes an order of reinstatement in service, an order of payment of back wages is not automatic. It all depends on the facts and circumstances of the case. (Para 9) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 503

    Even in case where the information regarding pending criminal case is truthfully furnished and on acquittal therein, an employer has the discretion to consider the antecedents while issuing the letter of appointment. (Para 14) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 714

    For out of turn promotion, parity can't be claimed. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 277

    Government employees cannot be denied the annual increment merely because they are to retire on the very next day of earning the increment - The entitlement to receive increment therefore crystallises when the government servant completes requisite length of service with good conduct and becomes payable on the succeeding day - Increment is not an "incentive" to perform well the next year - The entitlement to the benefit of annual increment is due to the service already rendered. (Para 6.7) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 296

    Government resolutions cannot override statutory rules - In service jurisprudence, the service rules are liable to prevail - There can be Government resolutions being in consonance with or expounding the rules, but not in conflict with the same. (Para 25) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 196

    Government servants cannot claim the benefits of Double Overtime Allowance Benefits under the Factories Act, dehors the service rules - Unlike those employed in factories and industrial establishments, persons in public service who are holders of civil posts or in the civil services of the Union or the State are required to place themselves at the disposal of the Government all the time - Persons holding civil posts or in the civil services of the State enjoy certain privileges and hence, the claim made by the respondents ought to have been tested by the Tribunal and the High Court, in the proper perspective to see whether it is an attempt to get the best of both the worlds. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 321

    Gratuity-Death- cum-retirement gratuity is the benevolent scheme - Supreme Court imposes Rs 50,000 cost on the State of UP for challenging gratuity granted to widow of a deceased employee. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 95

    Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1970 (Delhi) - Clause XII Rule 7C - The Supreme Court set aside an order of the Delhi High Court that permitted re-evaluation of the answer script of a candidate for the Delhi Higher Judicial Main Examination 2022 on the ground that there was no 'material error' warranting interference. (Para 5) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 553

    Higher Judicial Services Special Rules 1961 (Kerala State); Rule 2(c)(iii) - The decision of the High Court of Kerala to apply a minimum cut-off to the viva voce examination is contrary to Rule 2(c)(iii) of the 1961 Rules. (Para 51) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 658

    Idea behind extension of retirement age of doctors was to take care of the emergency situation caused by shortage of doctors, which was resulting in affecting the studies or patient care. It was not merely to grant benefits to a particular class. (Para 19) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 710

    If in a disciplinary proceeding, the order of penalty can be imposed on the charges proved and the punishment imposed is lawfully sustainable on those charges, it is not for the Court to consider whether those grounds alone would have weighed with the authority in imposing the punishment. Unless punishment imposed is only co-relatable to any of those charges found not proved, the penalty cannot be set aside. (Para 39) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 719

    If one of the selected candidates joins and then resigns, it gives rise to a fresh vacancy which could not have been filled up without issuing a proper advertisement and following the fresh selection process. (Para 18) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 812

    If the candidature is not rejected at the threshold and the candidate is allowed to participate in the selection process and ultimately their name figures in the merit list - though such candidate has no indefeasible right to claim appointment - they do have a limited right of being accorded fair and non-discriminatory treatment. (Para 15) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 882

    In a disciplinary proceeding, the question of burden of proof would depend upon the nature of the charge and the nature of the explanation put forward by the employee. In a given case, the burden may be shifted to the employee depending upon the explanation. (Para 23) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 719

    In absence of sanctioned post, the State cannot be compelled to create the post and absorb the persons who are continuing in service of the State - Direction of the High Court to reinstate after creating the posts and absorb the respondents based on their qualification is not sustainable in law. (Para 54 to 57) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 294

    Inquiry proceedings civil servant can be done away with in national security interest. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 432

    Issuance of order of appointment is required to be left on the discretion of the employer and the High Court ought not to have taken away the said discretion. (Para 14) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 714

    It is not possible to accept that for the entire period of thirteen years, the employee had no source of income. However, the employer has not come out with the case that from the date of his removal from service, the employee had another source of income. Thus, the employee discharged the burden on him by establishing that he was unemployed. (Para 9) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 503

    It is trite law that courts would not prescribe the qualification and/or declare the equivalency of a course. Until and unless rule itself prescribes the equivalency, namely, different courses being treated alike, the courts would not supplement its views or substitute its views to that of expert bodies. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 256

    Joining the service of a disciplined force like CISF after suppressing criminal cases is a grave misconduct - Removal from service justified. (Para 9, 13) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 44

    Judge aspirants get relief; Supreme Court sets aside BPSC's rejection of candidates for not producing original certificates. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 818

    Judicial review cannot be exercised to re-appreciate evidence in departmental enquiry proceedings. A Constitutional Court, while exercising its power of judicial review, cannot decide the case as if it is the first stage of the case, as if inquiry is still being conducted and an inquiry report is being prepared. Evidence cannot be re-appreciated at the stage of judicial review in a disciplinary proceeding as if conviction in a criminal trial is being re-examined by the next higher court. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 478

    Mere acquittal in a criminal case does not entitle an employee to reinstatement in service. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 150

    No pension for past service if a central govt employee resigns to join another govt post without permission. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 807

    Officer given higher pay than others in same cadre: Supreme Court slams favouritism, directs recovery. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 1044

    Once appointment is declared illegal and void ab initio, one cannot legally continue in service and claim salary. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 691

    One Rank One Pension (OROP) - Supreme Court extends the time for Centre to disburse pension arrears for ex-servicemen under the OROP scheme. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 264

    Pay revision is a matters falling within the domain of executive policy making-What is within the domain of the court, is to examine the impact of such fixation and whether it results in discrimination. (Para 27) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 81

    Payment for Home Guards - Home Guards working in the State of Odisha are entitled to Duty Allowance as per the minimum amount of pay to which the police personnel in the State is entitled to. It further clarified that the Home Guards shall be entitled to the periodical rise which may be available to the police personnel of the State and the Duty Allowance to be paid to the Home Guards should be periodically increased taking into consideration the minimum of the pay to which the Police personnel of the State are entitled considering periodical increase from time to time. (Para 9, 10) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 213

    Penalty imposed in this case is “reduction in basic pay to the lowest stage in Scale-I” as envisaged under Rule 49 (e) of the State Bank of India (Supervising Staff) Service Rules and further, to treat the period spent by the delinquent officer under suspension from 18.08.1990 till the date of his reinstatement as suspension only. Since the charge of not conducting periodical inspection and the failure to complete the formalities for creating equitable mortgage are supported by evidence, we do not think that the penalty as imposed is disproportionate so as to shock the conscience of the Court. (Para 40) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 719

    Pension - Supreme Court holds that the employees of Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board are not entitled to pension on a par with Government employees - Employees of a body corporate created by the State cannot be treated as State Government employees in all respects. Such a corollary proposition would practically amount to merging of the Board with the State Government - Entitlement of pension will be as per the Regulations of the Board. (Para 16.1) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 214

    Pension - The right to pensionary benefit is a constitutional right and as such cannot be taken away without proper justification - the grant of pensionary benefits is not a bounty, but a right of the employee, and as such cannot be denied without proper justification. (Para 11 & 12) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 207

    Pension cannot be denied to employee citing wrongful deductions made towards the CPF scheme. Retired employees cannot be made to suffer due to mistakes committed by their employers. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 419

    Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961; Rule 185 - Disability Pension - The appellant, after serving the Indian Army for 15 years until 1987 and having an exemplary service record, was diagnosed with a "complete heart block." He was placed in the permanent low medical category, qualifying for a hundred percent disability treatment. Despite being granted a disability pension, the Armed Forces Appellate Tribunal (AFT) limited its duration to one year. The key contention was the appellant's refusal to undergo a potentially life-threatening surgery, which the Medical Board considered while assessing his disability. The Court emphasized Rule 185 of the Pension Regulations for the Army-1961, which prescribes that, if a disability is deemed incapable of improvement, the disability pension should be granted for 10 years initially, subject to reassessment. The AFT had either overlooked or not justified its deviation from this rule. The Court set aside the Tribunal's one-year confinement, directing that the appellant receive his disability pension for 10 years, after which a re-assessment would be in order, in line with Rule 185. The arrears and payments for the pension are restricted to three years prior to his appeal to the Tribunal and the relevant future duration. The appeal was thus allowed. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 831

    Power of judicial review exercised by a Court or a Tribunal against the orders of a departmental enquiry committee is only limited to ensuring "that the individual receives fair treatment and not to ensure that the conclusion which the authority reaches is necessarily correct in the eye of the Court -When an inquiry is conducted on the charges of misconduct by a public servant, the Court or Tribunal would be concerned only to the extent of determining whether the inquiry was held by a competent officer or whether the rules of natural justice and statutory rules were complied with. (Para 10) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 44

    Power of state government and selection committee to reduce cut-off marks after publication of results – Held, advertisement did not confer unbridled power either on state government or on selection committee to modify the selection process by reducing the qualifying marks after the results had already been published – Appeal allowed. (Para 26) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 137

    Probation - Employee found unsuitable for job can be dismissed without notice during the probationary period. (Para 19) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 761

    Promotion given to employee continuing in service on strength of interim order will lose effect once petition is dismissed. (Para 11) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 771

    Promotion in Services – Communicating grade awarded in Annual Confidential Report (ACR) – Uncommunicated ACR not to be considered for consideration of promotion – Whether ACR communicated with sufficient time to make representation against it be considered? – Held, ACR communicated one day before promotion committee was convened ought not to be considered since employee had 15 days' time to make a representation against it – Further held, either the DPC could have been postponed or the ACR ought not to have been considered and the same ought to have been treated as uncommunicated ACR – Writ petition allowed. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 139

    Public Interest Litigation - Debatable if PIL is not at all maintainable in service matters: Supreme Court leaves issue of law open. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 970

    Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 - Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965; Rule 14 - the disciplinary authority is empowered to appoint a retired employee as an inquiry authority. It is not necessary that the inquiry officer should be a public servant. Hence, no fault can be found as the inquiry officer was not a public servant, but a retired officer. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 609

    Public Service Commission cannot recommend more names than what have been advertised and any appointment, which is made in excess to the vacancies, which have been advertised would be arbitrary. The reason being that such selection/appointment would deprive those candidates who are not eligible for appointment at the time these posts were advertised but had become eligible in the subsequent year would be deprived of competing against such posts. (Para 22) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997

    Punishment imposed by disciplinary authority can be interfered with only if it is 'strikingly disproportionate'. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 49

    Rajasthan Non-governmental Educational Institutions Act - Prior approval of director of education required to remove employee. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 48

    Recruitment process for Junior Civil Judges - Directed the State to take immediate steps to fill 175 vacant posts - Rejected the State Governments plea to conduct Civil Judge recruitment by Public Service Commission instead of a Selection Committee that includes representatives of the High Court – Held, the High Court is best suited to understand the needs of the judicial service - the Judges of the High Court who participate in the selection process possess domain knowledge, both in the subject matter and the nature of the service. (Para 23) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 832

    Reducing cut-off marks after publication of results only to provide employment to a particular category violates Article 14. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 137

    Re-evaluation of Answer Sheets - Once on re-evaluation, the marks are increased the respective candidates whose marks are increased will have to be placed at appropriate place in the merit list. Non-grant of seniority based on revised marks, thus, would render the process of re-evaluation redundant. (Para 7) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 374

    Regularisation - Two conditions for regularisation of daily wage employees - Firstly, initial appointment must be done by the competent authority and Secondly, there must be a sanctioned post on which the daily rated employee must be working - No claim for regularization if these conditions are not met. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 91

    Regularisation can't be claimed if appointment was not by a competent authority & there's no sanctioned post. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 91

    Retired employees cannot claim benefit of subsequent Government decision to increase retirement age. (Para 17) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 710

    Retirement age cannot be increased based on superannuation age in another similar post. The age of superannuation for employees is determined solely by statutory rules. (Para 44) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 692

    Retirement age of an employee cannot be increased on the ground of devotion to the job. (Para 48) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 692

    Retirement age of Anganwadi workers – by enhancing the age of retirement, the requirement of substitute is delayed, remains bereft of logic, and that in any case, that does not provide a legal ground to force the state government to alter its policy only because such expectations are stated by the central government or because some other states have provided for such an age of discharge. (Para 11) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 387

    Retirement age of Anganwadi workers – Looking to the very nature of the work and the structure of services, when the state government is the primary authority to decide the service conditions, no mandamus can be issued to the state government to change its policy, regardless of the proportion of the share of the central government in the expenditure burden. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 387

    Retirement age of Anganwadi workers – Supporting the High Court judgment, the amicus curiae contended that the Court can always issue relevant directions to ensure that fundamental rights and protections available to the citizens are not violated. The amicus also pointed out the retirement age of Anganwadi Workers was 65 years in many states and stressed that parity in employment is a reasonable expectation. Held, that as regards the scheme in question, it is clear that even while certain propositions/expectations had been laid by the central government, the existing statutory norms do not provide for uniform age limit for retirement of AWs/AHs; and it is for the state government to decide as regards the service conditions, including the age of discharge. (Para 10) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 387

    Retirement age of Anganwadi workers – the decision cited by the learned counsel dealing with different eventualities and different principles do not provide any basis for issuance of a mandamus to the state government to change its policy, particularly when the policy is otherwise not shown to be suffering from any illegality or irrationality; rather the state is categorical in its submission that by way of this policy, the age of discharge of AWs/AHs is placed at par with those of the other employees of the state government and Public Sectors Undertakings in the state. (Para 11) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 387

    Retirement age of Anganwadi workers – the Supreme Court found fault with the High Court for issuing a mandamus to the State Government to change its policy regarding the retirement age of workers. The High Court reasoned that since 90% of expenses of the Integrated Child Development Services Scheme - under which the Anganwadi workers are engaged- are borne by the Central Government, there will not be a fundamental increase in the burden of the State if their retirement age is increased. Held, that this line of reasoning adopted by the High Court is unacceptable. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 387

    Retirement age of Anganwadi workers - the Supreme Court set aside a judgment of the Tripura High Court which directed the State Government to raise the retirement age of Anganwadi workers from 60 years to 65 years. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 387

    Right of candidate to be considered in accordance with law – No vested right to advertised post Candidates had right to be considered for appointment to the post in accordance with law – Held, a law which enabled a candidate to get a post could not be changed to facilitate another group of persons, since the candidate acquired a vested right to be considered in accordance with law. (Para 24) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 137

    SBI Officers Service Rules - When the first dismissal order against a person in service is in force, irrespective of all pending litigations or his age of superannuation, he cannot be deemed to be continuing in service. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 42

    Scope of judicial review against a departmental enquiry proceeding is very limited. It is not in the nature of an appeal and a review on merits of the decision is not permissible. The scope of the enquiry is to examine whether the decision-making process is legitimate and to ensure that the findings are not bereft of any evidence. If the records reveal that the findings are based on some evidence, it is not the function of the court in a judicial review to re-appreciate the same and arrive at an independent finding on the evidence. (Para 36) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 719

    Selection Process - Reduction in cut-off marks to accommodate candidates whose seats were reserved due to horizontal reservation – Difference between qualification for making an application and eligibility criteria determined after examination is conducted – Present matter dealt with not the qualification for making an application, but the eligibility of candidates determined on the basis of cut-off marks – Held, eligibility determined after examination is conducted could not be disturbed. (Para 22) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 137

    Selection Process - Whether advertisement made pursuant to notification could be changed – No amendment duly introduced – Modification on the advice of state government – An advertisement made pursuant to a notification would bind the parties – Had all the trappings of a statutory prescription unless it became contrary to either a rule or an act – Held, any change could only be introduced by way of an amendment and nothing else. (Para 23) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 137

    Service of Employees in Zilla Parishad should be counted for seniority when ZP has been absorbed by Municipal Corporation. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 229

    Suppression of Material Information' - Bare perusal of the details of the information sought in Column No. 12 indicates that, it was regarding arrest, detention and conviction by a Court in any offence. In case the answer was 'yes', then full particulars of the arrest or detention or conviction and sentence were required to be furnished. In case the answer was in the negative, no other particulars were required to be furnished. In the case on hand, in reply to the information asked the respondent gave the answer as “no”. As per the contents of the information sought and as per the answer given by the respondent, he is not required to furnish information regarding pending criminal case. Therefore, supply of such information by the respondent does not fall within the expression 'suppression of material information'. (Para 10) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 714

    Supreme Court dismisses PIL seeking 2 years' cooling off period for retired judges' post-retirement appointments. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 753

    Supreme Court grants notional seniority to private secretaries at Delhi High Court whose marks increased post re-evaluation of answer sheets. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 374

    Supreme Court passes slew of directions to High Courts of Madhya Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana for recruitment in district judiciary. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 962

    Supreme Court rejects the claim of employees to count the entire period of work-charged service for pension. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 371

    Supreme Court sets aside order of CBDT passed to compulsorily retire a gazetted officer-any exercise of power that exceeds the parameters prescribed by law or is motivated on account of extraneous or irrelevant factors or is driven by malicious intent or is on the face of it, so patently arbitrary that it cannot withstand judicial scrutiny, must be struck down -In such a case, this Court is inclined to pierce the smoke screen and on doing so, we are of the firm view that the order of compulsory retirement in the given facts and circumstances of the case cannot be sustained. The said order is punitive in nature and was passed to short-circuit the disciplinary proceedings pending against the appellant and ensure his immediate removal. The impugned order passed by the respondents does not pass muster as it fails to satisfy the underlying test of serving the interest of the public. (Para 34) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 165

    Supreme Court upholds ante dating of seniority list; says no prejudice caused as separate quotas prescribed for degree & diploma holders. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 946

    Supreme Court upholds ante dating of seniority list; says no prejudice caused as separate quotas prescribed for degree & diploma holders. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 946

    Supreme Court upholds disciplinary action against bank manager for lapses in loan approval; rejects defence of following superiors' instructions. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 733

    Tenure post & appointment made on regular post on tenure basis different' : Supreme Court allows lecturer's claim for pay protection. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 649

    The fact whether an employee after dismissal from service was gainfully employed is something which is within his special knowledge. Considering the principle incorporated in Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the initial burden is on the employee to come out with the case that he was not gainfully employed after the order of termination. It is a negative burden. However, in what manner the employee can discharge the said burden will depend upon on peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. It all depends on the pleadings and evidence on record. Since, it is a negative burden, in a given case, an assertion on oath by the employee that he was unemployed, may be sufficient compliance in the absence of any positive material brought on record by the employer. (Para 7) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 503

    There are three different categories of employment, if not more, in the country. They are, (i) employment which is statutorily protected under labour welfare legislations, so as to prevent exploitation and unfair labour practices; (ii) employment which falls outside the purview of the labour welfare legislations and hence, governed solely by the terms of the contract; and (iii) employment of persons to civil posts or in the civil services of the Union or the State. Any Court or Tribunal adjudicating a dispute relating to conditions of service of an employee, should keep in mind the different parameters applicable to these three different categories of employment. (Para 23) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 321

    To claim backwages, initial burden is on employee to establish that he was not gainfully employed during period of dismissal. (Para 7) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 503

    United Commercial Bank Officer, Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations 1976 - Disciplinary proceedings are considered to begin only after the service of a chargesheet and not show cause notice. (Para 20.1) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 893

    Vacancy - Once clear and anticipated vacancies have been advertised, appointments can only be made on these vacancies. Vacancies which could not be anticipated before the date of advertisement, or the vacancies which did not exist at the time of advertisement, are the vacancies for the future i.e., next selection process. (Para 28) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997

    VRS employees cannot claim parity with others who retired upon achieving the age of superannuation - They cannot claim parity with those who worked continuously, discharged their functions, and thereafter superannuated. VRS employees chose to opt and leave the service of the corporation; they found the VRS offer beneficial to them. (Para 39) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 81

    Waiting List - What constitutes a “waiting list” and what its purpose? (Para 23) 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 997

    Working for a long period on a contractual basis does not create a vested right to regularization. 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 801

    Next Story