Rajasthan High Court says govt employees cannot be dismissed due to administrative changes [Order Copy]
In a recent decision, the Rajasthan High Court has made it clear that public employment should not be terminated simply due to changes in the cut-off marks, especially if there was no fraud or misconduct involved. This ruling came from a case where the Court had to balance fairness and justice in light of shifting employment criteria.
Background of the Case
The case involved two petitioners. Petitioner No. 1 had applied for a government post in 2015 but was rejected due to specific criteria. Meanwhile, Petitioner No. 2, who was at the bottom of the merit list, was appointed to the same post in 2015. However, as the legal battle continued, the criteria were relaxed, and Petitioner No. 1 was recommended for the position in 2022. This led to Petitioner No. 2 receiving a show cause notice for dismissal, as the department sought to accommodate the newly recommended candidate.
Court’s Observations
Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur, who led the bench, emphasized that the High Court operates not only as a legal body but also as a court of equity. The Court’s role is to ensure that justice is served and to address any unfairness. The Court noted that it must balance various factors when deciding on such matters.
Arguments Presented
Petitioner No. 2’s counsel argued that he was duly selected based on merit and should not be dismissed, especially since there were existing vacancies. On the other hand, Petitioner No. 1’s counsel contended that, given his recent recommendation for the post, he should be appointed accordingly.
Court’s Decision
The Court reviewed previous decisions, including a similar case (Neeraj Kumari Meena v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.), which established that employees appointed based on merit cannot be dismissed due to administrative changes without evidence of misconduct. Taking into account the availability of vacancies and the fairness of the situation, the Court decided to protect the position of Petitioner No. 2. Additionally, it directed that Petitioner No. 1 be appointed to the post of College Lecturer (Philosophy) as recommended by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission.
Final Outcome
The Court’s judgment allowed both petitions. The show cause notice against Petitioner No. 2 was quashed, and Petitioner No. 1 was granted the appointment with all benefits from the date Petitioner No. 2 was appointed. This decision underscores the Court’s commitment to equity and justice, ensuring that individuals are not unfairly displaced due to procedural changes.
