Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Saturday, 08 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-11-27 allowed

Dinesh Kumar Kashyap & Ors. etc vs South East Central Railway & Ors. etc

Bench: 2 — Deepak Gupta, Hemant Gupta

In Brief

South East Central Railway advertised 5,798 Group D posts in 2010 and created a 20% extra replacement panel (6,995 candidates total) to cover non-joiners. Despite 624 vacancies remaining unfilled, no appointments were made from the replacement panel. The appellants (extra-list candidates) challenged this before the Tribunal and High Court, both dismissing their claims. The Supreme Court, in a 2-1 split decision, allowed the appeal. The majority held that although mere selection confers no vested right, the State cannot arbitrarily ignore a replacement panel without cogent reasons when large vacancies exist; it must act non-arbitrarily under Article 14. The dissent upheld the State's discretion, noting the replacement panel's validity had expired and concurrent recruitment cycles provided alternative sources. The majority ordered the appellants' appointment with notional seniority benefits.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Administrative Law Employment and Recruitment Rule of Law and Arbitrariness Constitutional Interpretation Public Administration Railway Recruitment

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login