रुद्र कुमार सैन बनाम भारत संघ
| Citation | (2000) 8 SCC 25 |
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Date | 18 September 2000 |
| Year | 2000 |
| Bench | G.T. Nanavati, R.P. Sethi JJ. |
| Acts/Articles | Article 14, Article 16 |
| Category | Service & Employment Law |
Key Principle Established
If the initial appointment is illegal and void, no right accrues to the appointee. An illegal appointment cannot be regularized.
Employees sought regularization of appointments that had been made without following proper recruitment procedures prescribed under the rules.
The Court held that an appointment made without following due process is void ab initio and confers no right on the appointee. Regularization cannot cure the inherent defect of an illegal appointment. Only appointments made through proper channels but suffering from procedural irregularities can be regularized.
This judgment drew the important distinction between illegal appointments and irregular appointments — only the latter can be regularized.
2014 SCC OnLine P&H 22487
Government policy on regularization of contractual employees under HKRNL must be implemented uniformly. Selective application violates Article 14.
Read Analysis(2008) 9 SCC 284
University recruitment must follow UGC norms and guidelines. Appointments made in violation of minimum qualification requirements are void ab initio.
Read Analysis(1993) 2 SCC 411
Recruitment bodies must follow fair and transparent selection processes. Any irregularity in the recruitment process vitiates the entire selection.
Read AnalysisThis judgment summary is for educational and research purposes. While care has been taken to accurately represent the ratio and findings, for authoritative reference always consult the original judgment text from official sources (SCC Online, AIR, Manupatra, or court websites).
22+ years of practice before Punjab & Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.