In Brief
Appellants were initially selected for English Stenographers in 1987 but, having no vacancies, were appointed temporarily to Hindi Stenographer vacancies with explicit termination upon resumption of regular duties. When new candidates (respondents) were selected and appointed substantively in 1988 for Hindi Stenographers, the appellants should have been terminated. Instead, they remained in service and were later reinstated in 1990, displacing the respondents. The High Court correctly quashed this, finding the 1987 select list had expired, the appellants failed the required speed test, and they were never selected through proper procedure. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court, holding that illegal appointments cannot be cured by length of service, two persons cannot occupy one sanctioned post, and duly selected candidates (respondents) must be restored.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.