The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has sharply criticised backdoor recruitment and regularisation practices in government institutions, observing that appointments made without a transparent selection process amount to a “fraud on the Constitution.” The court said temporary appointments made without advertisement or competitive examination, followed by later attempts at regularisation, violate the principles of equality and equal opportunity in public employment.
Contract Employees’ Regularisation Plea Rejected
The case arose from a petition filed by three junior engineers who had been working on a contractual basis at the University of Kashmir for nearly nine years. The petitioners sought regularisation of their services, arguing that they had served the institution for a long period without being granted permanent appointments.
FCRF’s Flagship Cyber Law Certification Returns With a New Four-Week Cohort
The division bench rejected the plea, holding that public posts can be filled only through an open, transparent and competitive process. The court also put an interim stay on the ongoing recruitment process at the University of Kashmir.
During the hearing, it was pointed out that the petitioners had approached the court after a fresh recruitment process was initiated. While noting the human aspect of employees working for years on temporary terms, the court made it clear that long service alone cannot become the basis for regular appointment.
Court Flags ‘Pick-and-Choose’ Recruitment Practices
In its observations, the court said successive governments had followed a “pick-and-choose” policy for years while making temporary appointments. In many such cases, public advertisements were not issued and competitive examinations were not conducted before appointments were made.
The court said later policies introduced to regularise such employees undermined the rights of lakhs of deserving candidates who prepare for government jobs through proper competitive channels. It observed that public employment is not a private favour to be distributed arbitrarily, but a constitutional responsibility requiring equal opportunity for every eligible citizen.
The bench further noted that such practices had gradually become a tool for political gains and cheap popularity. It observed that different governments allegedly used temporary appointments to serve political interests, damaging transparency and credibility in public recruitment.
Ruling May Shape Future Recruitment Policies
The High Court said appointments made without advertisement, examination or open competition amount to injustice against qualified aspirants waiting for fair opportunities. It warned that legitimising such practices could erode public confidence in government recruitment mechanisms.
The court also said such policies dilute the spirit of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before law and equal opportunity in public employment. At the same time, it allowed limited relief to the petitioners by permitting them to participate in future regular recruitment processes if they meet the eligibility criteria.
Legal experts believe the ruling could have wider implications beyond the University of Kashmir. Similar disputes involving ad hoc, contractual and temporary employees seeking regularisation are pending in several places, and the judgment is expected to strengthen calls for transparent, merit-based recruitment in public institutions.
