Selectees unlawfully denied appointment are entitled to retrospective appointment, but not back wages for periods not worked.

The petitioner sought appointment as Sahayak Adhyapak/Prathmik Shikshak after completion of three years’ service as a Samvida Shikshak Grade-III, along with retrospective seniority, consequential service benefits and ₹10 lakh in costs.

She relied on a coordinate Bench’s decision in Vinod Kumar Sharma v. State of M.P. and Others, W.P. No. 23307 of 2024, which had granted relief concerning retrospective appointment following delayed implementation of the State’s policy; she also stated that she had completed the BTI course.

The State was represented by the Government Advocate.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to the relief granted in Vinod Kumar Sharma, including appointment with retrospective effect and consequential service benefits.

Whether the respondents should be directed to provide the applicable relief within a specified period.

The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Court applied the coordinate Bench’s decision in Vinod Kumar Sharma, which relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Smita Shrivastava v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 764.

As recounted in Vinod Kumar Sharma, Smita Shrivastava recognised restitutive relief where arbitrary State action had unlawfully delayed appointment, including appointment effective from the date of the first appointment order pursuant to the relevant selection process, continuity of service, and no back wages.

The coordinate Bench granted retrospective appointment but denied monetary benefits for the period during which the petitioner had not worked.

The Court accepted the petitioner’s reliance on Vinod Kumar Sharma and found that its order should govern her case.

Rather than independently re-examining each claimed benefit, it directed that the earlier decision apply mutatis mutandis.

The Court did not separately specify in its order whether the petitioner was entitled to the ₹10 lakh cost claimed; it directed the respondents to grant the benefit governed by Vinod Kumar Sharma.

The respondent authorities were directed to grant the applicable benefit within three months of receiving a certified copy of the order.