INVALID APPOINTMENTS FROM TAINTED RECRUITMENT ARE NOT PROTECTED BY ARTICLE 311(2) OR NATURAL JUSTICE.

The applicants were appointed as Fireman/Fireman Driver in the Fire & Emergency Services Department of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir following a recruitment process that included physical tests, written examinations, document verification, and medical examination.

Initially, challenges to the legality of this selection process were dismissed by both the Tribunal and the High Court.

Subsequently, allegations of large-scale irregularities and manipulation in the recruitment process surfaced, leading the Government to constitute an Inquiry Committee via Government Order No. 1513-JK(GAD) of 2022 dated 12.12.2022.

The Inquiry Committee, after a detailed examination of records and inputs from multiple agencies including ACB, Crime Branch, and CID, submitted a report on 10.02.2024, highlighting serious irregularities such as question paper leakage, mass copying, use of gadgets, impersonation, manipulation of marks, suspicious concentration of selections from particular districts, and selection of under-qualified or ineligible candidates.

Based on these findings and communications from the Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Government issued Government Order No. 608-Home of 2025 dated 15.12.2025, terminating the services of numerous appointees, including the applicants in O.A. No. 2051/2025 and O.A. No. 2052/2025, on the grounds that the recruitment process was vitiated by irregularities.

The applicants contended that their termination was without individual attribution of fraud, misconduct, or a departmental enquiry.

O.A. No. 643/2022, which is part of this common judgment, had earlier questioned the legality of the same selection process.

Whether the applicants in O.A. Nos. 2051/2025 and 2052/2025 can claim continuation in service on the ground that no individual notice or departmental enquiry was held against each of them, even when the record produced by the respondents showed that the recruitment process itself was vitiated by grave and large-scale irregularities.

Whether O.A. No. 643/2022 survives for adjudication given the subsequent termination of appointments based on the inquiry into tainted recruitment.

The court primarily applied the principle that fraud vitiates every solemn act, asserting that no right can be claimed on the basis of a fraudulent act and that a polluted source cannot yield protected benefits.

It cited *Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority v. Karamjit Singh* (2019) 16 SCC 782, which stated that regularization obtained by misrepresenting facts or fraud cannot be sustained.

The court also relied on *State of Bihar v. Upendra Narayan Singh* (2009) 5 SCC 65, establishing that appointments made in violation of the constitutional scheme or through an illegitimate process do not create enforceable rights.

*Devendra Kumar v. State of Uttaranchal* (2013) 9 SCC 363 was referenced to highlight that where entry into service is based on falsehood or illegality, the employee cannot seek equitable protection.

The principle from *State of West Bengal v. Baishakhi Bhattacharyya* (2025) SCC OnLine SC 719, was also applied, stating that if a recruitment process is prima facie tainted, beneficiaries cannot insist on its preservation, especially when there is systemic manipulation, and individual notice may not be necessary in such cases.

The court distinguished the protection under Article 311(2) of the Constitution, citing *R. Vishwanatha Pillai v. State of Kerala* (2004) 2 SCC 105, which holds that if an appointment is void ab initio due to fraud, Article 311 protection is not attracted.

The court found that the recruitment process for Fireman/Fireman Driver posts was "seriously tainted by fraud, manipulation and systemic irregularities" based on the Inquiry Committee's report and vigilante inputs from agencies like ACB, Crime Branch, and CID.

The material provided showed widespread issues like question paper leakage, manipulated marks for 106 candidates, existence of touts, and monetary transactions, which collectively pointed to a "scam of considerable breadth" and "systemic corruption".

The court explicitly rejected the argument that individual notice or departmental inquiry was necessary for each applicant, distinguishing between punishment for individual misconduct and termination arising from a "fundamentally tainted" selection process.

It held that public employment is a constitutional trust, and allowing appointments from a compromised process would be a dereliction of duty by the state.

The court reinforced that a fraudulent entry does not become a protected status over time.

It also dismissed the argument that previous judicial rulings upholding the selection insulated it from later correction when "substantial additional material surfaces through vigilance or criminal inquiry".

The court reiterated that the administrative invalidation of a tainted recruitment is distinct from criminal liability, which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Given the "large-scale fraud and systemic manipulation," requiring individual departmental inquiries would be an "unrealistic" and "futile formality" that would defeat public interest, especially when the "vice is embedded in the source itself".

It concluded that the recruitment process for Fireman/Fireman Driver posts was seriously tainted by fraud and systemic irregularities.

Consequently, no enforceable right to continue in service could arise, and the protection of Article 311(2) of the Constitution was not applicable to appointments void ab initio or resulting from a tainted selection.

The court held that the government was justified in taking corrective action, and the argument of natural justice violation was not sustainable, as the vice went to the root of the selection.

O.A. No. 643/2022 was disposed of as infructuous, as its grievance had been addressed by the government's subsequent actions in terminating the impugned appointments.

The Tribunal further directed the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir authorities to investigate and take strict and expeditious action against all erring officials, middlemen, and other persons found involved in the manipulation of the recruitment process to uphold the rule of law and restore public faith.