Midde Rathan Kishore And Ors. vs Registrar (Admn.), High Court Of A.P., ... on 6 June, 2002
In B, Bavu v. Vice-Chancellor, A.P. Agricultural University, (DB), this Court held that the question as to whether a person is entitled to be regularised or not depends upon his status. Mere continuation in service for a long period of time, will by itself not change the status in the absence of any statutory rule providing therefor. In this case, it is not disputed before us that the petitioners were appointed on temporary basis under Rule 16 of the Rules. At the time of their appointments, the Ministerial Service Rules framed in terms of the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India were in vogue and they had not been followed. The State while granting appointment to a person is not only bound to follow the recruitment rules made in terms of the proviso appended to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, but is also bound to give effect to the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. No right, far less any enforceable right flows from such illegal appointments. A person who is appointed to a public post in breach of statutory rules cannot claim permanence in that post merely because he had been working for considerable time. Authorities are not wanting.