Union of India and Anr. v. Raghuwar Pal Singh
Background
The respondent was appointed as a Veterinary Compounder at a Central Cattle Breeding Farm in 1999 by an officer who was only authorized to handle the "current duties" of the Director's post, and without the required prior approval of the competent authority. When this came to light, the department cancelled the appointment and terminated his services without a hearing. The Central Administrative Tribunal upheld the termination, but the High Court reversed it, holding the appointment was only an irregularity curable without a hearing requirement, so he should have been given one.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that an appointment made without the mandatory prior approval of the competent authority was not a mere irregularity but a nullity, void from the start, because that approval requirement was an essential safeguard, not a directory formality. It also noted the appointing officer had constituted the selection board and chaired it despite a conflict of interest involving a relative-candidate. Since the appointment was void ab initio, the Court held that affording a hearing before terminating it was not an essential requirement and would have been an exercise in futility, distinguishing the precedent the High Court had relied on. It therefore set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the Tribunal's order dismissing the respondent's challenge.
Lesson Learnt
When a government appointment is made without a legally mandatory approval step, it is void from inception rather than a fixable irregularity, and where an appointment never had any legal existence, the usual rule requiring a hearing before termination does not apply.