Court Rules Appointment Violating SC Reservation and Statutory Procedure Cannot Acquire Validity Even Under Interim Orders; Re-advertisement of Post Declared Lawful
In a significant judgment dated September 14, 2026, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Manju Rani Chauhan, dismissed the writ petition filed by Anil Kumar Chaudhary challenging the disapproval of his appointment as an Assistant Teacher at Kanhaiya Junior High School, Gorakhpur. The Court reinforced the inviolability of the reservation policy for Scheduled Caste (SC) candidates and upheld the statutory procedure mandated under the Uttar Pradesh Recognized Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978.
Anil Kumar Chaudhary had been appointed as Assistant Teacher in May 1988 following a selection process by the Committee of Management of the Institution, which included the nominee of the District Basic Education Officer, Gorakhpur. Despite securing the highest marks and joining duties, his appointment was not approved by the District Basic Education Officer (respondent no. 1) due to non-compliance with the mandatory SC reservation requirements. The officer explicitly disapproved the appointment in an order dated December 31, 1988, citing that the post was reserved for SC candidates and the appointment lacked prior written approval.
The petitioner contended that his appointment was valid by virtue of the deemed approval provision under Rule 10(5)(iii) of the Rules of 1978, which states that failure to communicate approval within the prescribed period shall be deemed as approval. He also argued that the subsequent re-advertisement of the post, reserved for SC candidates, was unlawful since the post was already filled. Furthermore, he challenged the disapproval order for violating principles of natural justice by not providing him an individual hearing.
However, the Court held that the fundamental statutory requirement of reservation could not be overridden by the deemed approval provision. The interim protection he enjoyed through a court order did not confer substantive validity on an appointment made in breach of mandatory rules. The Court emphasized that the participation of the District Basic Education Officer's nominee in the selection process did not cure the illegality arising from ignoring the reservation policy.
On the natural justice plea, the Court reasoned that when the appointment itself was illegal and not in conformity with the statutory framework, the denial of a separate hearing before disapproval did not violate natural justice. It observed that the District Basic Education Officer had raised queries and the Committee of Management had responded, which sufficed as an opportunity to be heard.
Regarding the re-advertisement of the post reserved for SC candidates, the Court held that since the initial appointment was invalid and the post was never lawfully filled, the re-advertisement was justified and did not amount to creation of an artificial vacancy.
While the Court dismissed the petitioner's claim for salary and retiral benefits flowing from the invalid appointment, it left open the question of salary for the period he actually served under the interim court order, stating that such claims must be considered separately in accordance with law and the terms of the interim protection.
This judgment reaffirms the mandatory nature of reservation policies in public employment and clarifies that statutory procedures and approvals cannot be bypassed or legitimized by interim judicial orders or deemed approval rules. It also underscores that appointments made in violation of such policies lack substantive validity and cannot confer vested rights to the appointee.
Bottom Line:
Appointment of a teacher in violation of the prescribed reservation policy and statutory procedure cannot acquire statutory validity merely by virtue of an interim court order or the deemed approval provision under the applicable rules.
Statutory provision(s):
Uttar Pradesh Recognized Basic Schools (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 - Rule 10(5)(iii)
