RAJESH SHANKAR
Sunil Kumar S/o Hanuman Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
1. Both these writ petitions have been preferred for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 737/J dated 16.06.2021 issued under the signature of the Principal Secretary-cum-Legal Remembrancer, Department of Law, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, whereby the petitioners’ claim for regularization has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization/absorption on Class III post i.e. Lower Division Clerk giving them age relaxation with all consequential benefits.
2. Argument advanced on behalf of the petitioners:
National Fertilizers Ltd. & Others Vs. Somvir Singh
Narendra Kumar Tiwari & Others Vs. State of Jharkhand & Others
R.N. Nanjundappa v. T. Thimmiah
State of Karnataka v. M.L. Kesari
State of Mysore v. S.V. Narayanappa
State of Karnataka Vs. M.L Kesari & Others
State of Karnataka & Others Vs. M.L Keshri & Others
Irregular appointments made by competent authorities can be regularized if employees have served for over ten years, emphasizing the need for pragmatic interpretation of rules.
Regularization of services for employees who have served for over ten years is a right that must be considered by the state, provided there are no valid objections, and the state must adhere to its o....
Appointments not being sponsored by the employment exchange, as prescribed under Rule 149(2) of the Rules, would only make the appointments irregular and not illegal.
Completion of ten years of service gives a right to regularization, which cannot be negated by subsequent policy changes unless misconduct is proven.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of employees to regularization after completing ten years of service on sanctioned and vacant posts, as supported by constitutional....
An appointment made on the basis of administrative exigency and not vitiated by faults such as nepotism, bias, or malafides, could be regularized. Regularization cannot be a mode of recruitment, and ....
The extension of the policy for the private respondents was arbitrary and the regularization violated the 2010 Rules. The Court emphasized that no employee can be permanently appointed on a public po....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.