In Brief
The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a writ petition challenging a tenure-based appointment decision. The respondent, appointed as Director-General of Central Power Research Institute (CPRI) through direct recruitment for a five-year tenure, sought extension to his superannuation date. Held: Tenure-based appointments made through direct recruitment and approved by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet are valid and do not automatically confer permanent status. The respondent's delay in raising objections until near the end of tenure, combined with his initial acceptance of explicit tenure conditions, invoked the doctrines of laches and acquiescence. The employer's discretionary decision not to extend, based on an adverse suitability report approved by senior authorities, was not arbitrary. No fundamental rights violation occurred, and the private respondent had already been appointed through due procedure. The appeals filed by the Union were allowed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.