Sanjay Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. District Judge, Ambedkar Nagar 2025 INSC 1252 - Public Appointments
Public Appointments -Supreme Court set aside the 2008 termination of four Class IV employees, ordering limited relief and observed: recital in the advertisement would clearly indicate that the Appointing Authority intended that a wait list be maintained so as to fill up the vacancies arising in excess of those notified, which was permissible as per the rules. As has been pointed out from the counter affidavit after the advertisement of 2000, the next advertisement was only in 2008 and then in 2015. Definitely vacancies arose within the said period, and this is the reason why the appellants were appointed on various dates subsequent to the appointment to the twelve vacancies advertised.(Para 10)
Case Info
Case name: Sanjay Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. District Judge, Ambedkar Nagar (U.P.).
- Neutral citation: Not provided in the judgment text. Assumed docket reference: C.A. @ SLP(C) No.14980 of 2024; Civil Appeal No. of 2025.
- Coram: B. R. Gavai, CJI; K. Vinod Chandran, J.
- Judgment date: October 17, 2025.
- Disposition: Appeal allowed with directions; non‑precedential (peculiar facts).
Caselaws and Citations
- Naseem Ahmad and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, (2011) 2 SCC 734.Relied on for interpreting Rule 12 regarding maintaining a waiting list of “reasonable dimension” and permitting appointments against vacancies arising in the recruitment year or immediately succeeding year.
Statutes / Laws Referred
- Rule 12 governing recruitment to Class IV posts in district judgeships (process servers, orderlies, office peons, farashes) — interpreted per Naseem Ahmad; allows a waiting list of reasonable dimensions, usable for vacancies within the recruitment year or succeeding year.
