Legal Provisions Involved Article 14 of the Constitution
Judgement By: Supreme Court of India
Judge/Bench: Justice Rajesh Bindal
Facts
The case involved students who completed the Ayurvedic Nursing Training Course in Uttar Pradesh, mainly from government institutes. For many years, such students were usually appointed as Ayurvedic Staff Nurses after completing the course. Later, the State changed its policy and allowed private institutions to run the same course. Because of this change and limited vacancies, the State stopped giving automatic appointments. The Allahabad High Court directed the State to consider appointing these trainees, which led the State to approach the Supreme Court.
Key Legal Provisions
Article 14 of the Constitution of India
Issues Raised
- Whether completing training gives a right to government appointment?
- Whether past practice creates a legal expectation and whether refusal to appoint violated Article 14?
Arguments of the Case
The trainees argued that past practice and bond conditions gave them a right to appointment. The State argued that no promise of appointment was ever made and policy changes required fair competition.
Judgement
The Supreme Court ruled that completing a training course does not guarantee a government job. Past practice cannot create a right after policy changes. No violation of Article 14 was found.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
