The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside the termination of several district court employees who were removed from service more than two decades after their appointments. The Division Bench held that reopening such old service matters and branding the appointments as “illegal” was not justified in law.
Background of the Case
The petitions were filed by employees appointed in the mid-1990s to Class-III posts in district court establishments. Their appointments followed voluntary retirement of their parents, who had served in the same courts.
Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds Joint Insolvency Against Grand Venezia, Bhasin Group in Real Estate Dispute
In October 2017, the employees were removed from service after a scrutiny exercise initiated following earlier court directions against illegal public appointments. Authorities claimed that the appointments were contrary to procedure and violated service rules related to medical retirement and compassionate employment.
The petitioners challenged these orders, arguing that they were selected through a regular process, served continuously for over 22 to 25 years, and were promoted during service without any objection from the High Court administration.
Read also:- Poll-Eve Murder: Calcutta High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment of Convicts
Senior counsel for the petitioners told the court that at the time of appointment, there were no statutory recruitment rules governing Class-III posts in district courts. The district judges, therefore, had the authority to appoint staff following the prevailing practice.
It was also argued that the service rules later relied upon by the authorities were adopted after the petitioners had already been appointed.
“Their appointments were neither fraudulent nor backdoor entries,” the counsel submitted.
The State, however, defended the termination, citing earlier judgments that mandated cancellation of appointments made without strict adherence to recruitment rules.
Read also:- Supreme Court Restores Unopposed Panchayat Election, Says High Courts Must Not Interrupt Poll Process
Court’s Observations
The Division Bench Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal carefully traced the legal position applicable in the 1994–95 period. It noted that formal recruitment rules for district court staff came into force much later and that district judges had discretion to fill vacancies at the relevant time.
“The bench observed that the appointments, at worst, suffered from procedural irregularity and not illegality,” the court said, adding that irregularities cannot justify termination after decades of unblemished service.
Read also:- Maintenance Is Support, Not Income Sharing : Rajasthan High Court Rejects Wife’s Plea for Enhancement
The judges also underlined that promotions granted during service were forwarded to the High Court and never questioned, amounting to implied approval. Importantly, the court stressed that past service matters should not be unsettled after long delays unless fraud or misrepresentation is shown.
Decision
Allowing all the petitions, the High Court quashed the termination orders dated 28 October 2017. The court directed reinstatement of the petitioners to their respective posts, clarifying that they would not receive back wages but would be entitled to consequential service and promotional benefits as per law
Case Title:- Mohd. Shamim & Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
