Supreme Court Landmark: Ad Hoc Employees Without Interviews Cannot Be Regularised

In a significant ruling that reinforces the sanctity of public recruitment processes, the Supreme Court of India has partially set aside a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the regularisation of contractual and ad hoc employees.
​The decision, delivered by a bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Atul Chandurkar, clarifies the thin line between “irregular” and “illegal” appointments, emphasising that transparency—specifically through public advertisements and interviews—is non-negotiable for permanent government employment.
​The Core of the Dispute
​The case centred on four notifications issued by the Haryana government in 2014 intended to regularise Group B, C, and D employees. While the High Court had previously quashed all of them, the Supreme Court took a nuanced approach:
​The June 2014 Notifications (UPHELD): The Court restored these, noting they were meant for employees who met recruitment norms (sanctioned posts, qualifications, and reservation) but were left out of previous policies.
​The July 2014 Notifications (STRUCK DOWN): These were declared illegal because they sought to regularise staff hired without public advertisement or interview.
​Why the “July Notifications” Failed the Legal Test
​The Court’s reasoning was anchored in the landmark judgment of the Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006). The Justices highlighted several red flags:
​Lack of Transparency: Hiring without advertisements creates “doubts as regards the manner of engagement.”
​Future Cut-off Dates: The policy attempted to include employees who would only complete 10 years of service by 2018, four years after the notification was issued.
​Blocking Regular Recruitment: By reserving posts for these ad hoc employees, the state was effectively preventing qualified candidates from applying through a fair, competitive process.
​A “Humanitarian” Middle Ground
​While the Court struck down the July notifications, it didn’t leave the affected employees completely stranded. Invoking Article 142, the Court directed that:
​Employees already in service under the 2014 policies should not be removed.
​Instead of regularisation, they will be placed on the lowest pay scale for their respective posts, in accordance with the principle of “equal pay for equal work.”
​Key Takeaways for Public Service
​This judgment serves as a stern reminder to State Governments that executive power under Article 162 cannot be used to bypass the constitutional requirement of merit-based public appointments. Regularisation is a “one-time measure,” not a backdoor for permanent employment.
​#LegalNews #SupremeCourt #EmploymentLaw #AdHocEmployees #HaryanaGovernment #UmadeviJudgment #PublicService #LaborLaw #IndianJudiciary #RightToWork

 

Presented by

Advocate Vijay Singh

MS LLB LLM MBA

Ex MO, Ex VP, Law Counsel