ASHWANI KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

ASHWANI KUMAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Appointments made in violation of executive instructions and without following the prescribed procedure—including non-adherence to reservations, employment exchange requirements, and lack of written orders—are irregular or void ab initio and cannot be regularised unless the regularisation procedure itself is strictly followed. However, where the State fails to identify specific individuals who were illegally appointed beyond sanctioned posts, and principles of natural justice were not adequately observed, the benefit of the doubt, in view of Article 21, must be given to the employees; thus, termination orders against 1363 appellants are set aside and they are deemed regularly appointed.

Parties
Appellant: Ashwani Kumar and Others; Respondent: State of Bihar and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 November 1995
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Appeal (from Writ Petitions Under Article 226 of the Constitution Decided by the High Court) / Referred to a Three Judge Bench Due to Disagreement Between Two Judge Bench
Outcome
Termination orders against the 1363 appellants set aside; they are deemed regularly appointed
Legal Topics
Regularisation of Service, Recruitment Procedure, Natural Justice, Existence of Post, Validity of Appointments, Termination of Service
Service Law Constitutional Law Regularisation of Service Recruitment Procedure Natural Justice Existence of Post Validity of Appointments Termination of Service

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashwani Kumar and Others

Appellant

State of Bihar and Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Appeal (from Writ Petitions Under Article 226 of the Constitution Decided by the High Court) / Referred to a Three Judge Bench Due to Disagreement Between Two Judge Bench

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether existence of law or statutory rules is a precondition to create or fill up posts under the State?
  2. 2 Whether existence of a post is a condition precedent for appointment under the State?
  3. 3 Whether casual labourers are holders of a post for purposes of regularisation?

Ratio Decidendi

Appointments made in violation of executive instructions and without following the prescribed procedure—including non-adherence to reservations, employment exchange requirements, and lack of written orders—are irregular or void ab initio and cannot be regularised unless the regularisation procedure itself is strictly followed. However, where the State fails to identify specific individuals who were illegally appointed beyond sanctioned posts, and principles of natural justice were not adequately observed, the benefit of the doubt, in view of Article 21, must be given to the employees; thus, termination orders against 1363 appellants are set aside and they are deemed regularly appointed.

Court Disposition

Termination orders against the 1363 appellants set aside; they are deemed regularly appointed

Orders

  • Appellants reinstated within two months
  • No back wages/salaries, but other service benefits allowed