The Supreme Court has set aside the termination of four Class IV employees of the Ambedkar Nagar District Judgeship, whose services were ended in 2008 on the ground that their appointments exceeded the number of advertised vacancies. The Court found the termination unjustified and directed their reappointment or grant of minimum pension, depending on their age and eligibility.

A Bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran noted that the 2000 recruitment advertisement for 12 posts had expressly stated that the number of vacancies “may increase or decrease,” thereby permitting the preparation of a waiting list under Rule 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules. Relying on the precedent in Naseem Ahmad v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2011) 2 SCC 734, the Court held that appointments made from the waiting list to vacancies arising within a reasonable period were valid.

Observing that the employees had worked for eight years before termination and had been out of service for 17 years, the Court ordered that those below the age of superannuation be reinstated against existing or supernumerary posts, while those who had crossed the retirement age be granted minimum pension. The Court clarified that the relief was confined to the four appellants and was not to be treated as a precedent.