In Brief
The Supreme Court held that ad-hoc employees appointed in 1983-1989 and regularized in 2000 from their initial appointment date, cannot claim seniority over substantive appointees recruited through open selection in 1987. Although the ad-hoc appointees qualified typing tests in 1992 and were regularized from their initial appointment, they lack the prerequisite formal selection credentials of substantive appointees. The Division Bench misinterpreted an interim order protecting seniority against a specific recruitment panel to mean ad-hoc appointees could rank above all substantive recruits. The Court set aside the Division Bench's judgment, holding that substantive appointees retain seniority precedence absent statutory rules defining otherwise.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.