The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu has issued a significant reprieve for two Food Corporation of India (FCI) employees, setting aside their immediate discharge from service. In a ruling delivered by Justice Sanjay Dhar, the court held that while the organization is entitled to prescribe mandatory proficiency tests for probationers, the petitioners were unfairly denied a reasonable opportunity to prepare for their examination. As a result, the court has stayed the discharge orders and directed the corporation to conduct a fresh assessment, granting the employees one final attempt to secure their positions.

The dispute originated from the discharge orders issued in June 2026, which terminated the services of the petitioners, both appointed as Assistant Grade-III (Hindi), on the grounds that they failed to meet a mandatory 30 words-per-minute Hindi typing speed requirement. Although this condition was not part of the initial statutory regulations, the Food Corporation of India had incorporated the test as a prerequisite for confirming candidates during their probationary period through various internal circulars. The petitioners, who had successfully cleared the competitive recruitment process and fulfilled other academic requirements, argued that the typing test condition was improperly imposed and that they had not been given adequate notice or preparation time to adapt to the new testing protocol.

Challenges to Probationary Standards and Regulatory Power

The legal battle centered on whether the Food Corporation of India had the authority to impose additional testing requirements for confirmation not explicitly detailed in the original staff regulations. Counsel for the petitioners contended that Regulation 15 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1971, governs the probation period and does not include provisions for a mandatory typing test. They argued that the circulars issued in 2023 and 2024, which retroactively introduced the typing test for candidates like the petitioners, lacked the formal sanction of the Central Government and were not published in the Official Gazette, thus questioning their enforceability.

However, the respondents defended the action by emphasizing that the nature of the Assistant Grade-III (Hindi) role necessitated proficiency in both Hindi and English for translation tasks. They maintained that the recruitment advertisement, which the petitioners had accepted without objection, explicitly stated that confirmation of probation would be contingent upon qualifying the prescribed typing test. The corporation asserted that the decision was consistent with its internal policy guidelines designed to ensure that only personnel with the requisite technical skills were confirmed into permanent service.

Judicial Balancing of Administrative Discretion and Fairness

Justice Sanjay Dhar evaluated the corporation's internal governance structure, noting that under Regulation 91 of the Staff Regulations, the Board of Directors is vested with residual authority to issue general instructions to address difficulties or lacunae in the interpretation of existing rules. The court observed that, while the corporation possesses the legal competence to prescribe such tests for the purpose of verifying performance during the probation period, the implementation of these tests must satisfy the requirements of natural justice.

The court identified a critical procedural lapse in how the tests were administered to the petitioners. "However, it appears that the petitioners have been hard done by the act of the respondents in holding the Hindi typing test without giving them adequate opportunity to prepare for the said test," Justice Dhar noted, highlighting the impracticality of providing only a few days of notice for a skill-based evaluation. The court further remarked on the significance of administrative consistency , noting that the corporation’s objective in mandating these tests—ensuring translation proficiency—was valid, provided the process allowed for a fair evaluation of the candidates' capabilities.

Addressing the contention regarding the lack of a formal notice prior to discharge, the court observed that since the petitioners had not been formally confirmed, they remained on probation. Under the governing regulations, a probationer can be discharged without specific reasons, provided the process adheres to the notice period requirements. However, the court prioritized the principle of fair play, determining that an arbitrary or hasty testing schedule undermined the fairness of the entire probationary review process. The judgment underscored that even within the framework of probation, employees are entitled to a reasonable environment in which to demonstrate their competency.

The court’s directive serves as a balanced resolution, affirming the corporation's right to maintain performance standards while correcting the specific procedural deficiencies that penalized these employees. By mandating a one-month preparation period, the court has effectively acknowledged the need for candidates to adjust to the specific technical demands of their assigned roles, moving away from purely mechanical or short-notice testing.

The operative order requires the Food Corporation of India to allow the petitioners to undergo the Hindi typing test once more, with at least one month of preparatory time. The discharge orders will remain in abeyance throughout this period. Should the petitioners qualify in this final attempt, the corporation is instructed to process their confirmation, provided no other legal or administrative impediments exist. Conversely, if the petitioners fail to clear the test after this additional opportunity, the discharge orders will take immediate effect, and their services will be terminated. This ruling ensures that both the employer’s need for qualified staff and the employees' right to a fair assessment are upheld, concluding this stage of the litigation.