STATE OF U.P. versus NEERAJ AWASTHI AND ORS.
High Court's jurisdiction does not extend to framing schemes for regularization of irregularly appointed employees absent sanctioned posts and in breach of statutory/regulatory requirements; such appointment is void ab initio and not entitled to legal protection or regularization.
- Parties
- Appellant: State of U.P.; Respondents: Neeraj Awasthi and Ors.
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 16 December 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal allowed, prior High Court judgment set aside
- Legal Topics
- Irregular Appointments, Regularization of Employees, Jurisdiction of High Court, Mandamus, Constitutional Scheme Under Articles 14 and 16
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
State of U.P.
Appellant
Neeraj Awasthi and Ors.
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to issue a direction for framing a scheme for regularization of the employees of the U.P. State Agricultural Produce Market Board
Ratio Decidendi
High Court's jurisdiction does not extend to framing schemes for regularization of irregularly appointed employees absent sanctioned posts and in breach of statutory/regulatory requirements; such appointment is void ab initio and not entitled to legal protection or regularization.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed, prior High Court judgment set aside
Orders
- Board and committees must fill up existing vacancies strictly in accordance with law within six months.
- Terminated employees’ candidature should be considered with possible age relaxation.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment