Void appointment for want of prior approval can be cancelled without hearing where natural justice would be an empty formality.

An appointment made under the recruitment regime without prior approval of the competent authority was held to be void ab initio, not a mere irregularity, because the appointing officer acted beyond authority and an essential statutory condition was breached. On that basis, the appointee acquired no enforceable right to continue in service. The Court further held that no prior hearing was required before cancelling such a void appointment, since natural justice would be an empty formality where invalidity is admitted from the record. The termination order was therefore upheld, and interference with the cancellation was found unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether an appointment made without prior approval of the competent authority under the governing recruitment regime was a nullity or a mere irregularity; (ii) whether the services of such appointee could be terminated without affording an opportunity of hearing.

Issue (i): whether an appointment made without prior approval of the competent authority under the governing recruitment regime was a nullity or a mere irregularity.

Analysis: The recruitment rules and executive instructions required appointment to be made only by an authorised officer and only after prior approval of the competent authority. The appointment was issued before such approval was obtained. The reasoning also noted that the selection process itself was irregular and that the appointing officer acted beyond authority. An appointment made in breach of an essential statutory condition was not treated as a curable irregularity but as one lacking legal authority.

Conclusion: The appointment was a nullity and not a mere irregularity.

Issue (ii): whether the services of such appointee could be terminated without affording an opportunity of hearing.

Analysis: Once the appointment itself was void ab initio, no enforceable right to continue in service arose. In that situation, a hearing before cancellation of the illegal appointment would serve no useful purpose. The requirement of natural justice was held inapplicable where the foundational appointment itself was without authority and its invalidity was apparent from the admitted facts.

Conclusion: No prior opportunity of hearing was required before cancelling the appointment and terminating service.

Final Conclusion: The termination order was valid, the High Court's interference was unsustainable, and the Tribunal's decision dismissing the challenge to the cancellation of appointment stood restored.

Ratio Decidendi: An appointment made in breach of an essential requirement of prior approval by the competent authority is void ab initio, and cancellation of such a void appointment does not require prior notice or hearing where observance of natural justice would be an empty formality.

---