Mandatory re-employment procedure governs post-superannuation service extension; breach renders the appointment unsustainable and requires fresh DPC consideration.

Mandatory re-employment procedures under the governing service handbook must be strictly followed when superannuation is to be deferred as an exceptional measure. The document explains that such re-employment requires compliance with prescribed criteria, including public interest assessment, consideration of eligible officers, and completion of required processing formalities; approval based only on ministerial recommendation and chief ministerial sanction was insufficient where the mandatory documents and scrutiny were absent. An administrative order issued in breach of its own binding procedure is vulnerable to invalidation. The consequence stated is that the re-employment could not stand, and the affected eligible employee was entitled to fresh consideration through a duly constituted DPC.

---

---

Issues: Whether the grant of re-employment to the incumbent Director was valid when the mandatory procedure prescribed in Chapter 22 of the Hand Book on Personal Matters and Fundamental Rules 56(d) was not followed, and whether the petitioners were entitled to consequential consideration for promotion through a fresh DPC.

Analysis: The re-employment framework treats extension and re-employment as exceptional departures from the normal rule of superannuation and requires strict adherence to the prescribed criteria, including consideration of public interest, rare and exceptional circumstances, scrutiny of eligibility of other officers, and completion of the prescribed processing formalities. The record showed that the decision was driven by a recommendation from a Minister and approval by the Chief Minister, but the departmental procedure under Chapter 22 was not properly followed. The prescribed integrity certificate and proforma were absent, and there was no proper consideration of the availability of eligible officers or compliance with the mandatory processing requirements. Executive instructions issued by the Government are binding and must be followed in letter and spirit, and an administrative order made contrary to its own prescribed procedure is vulnerable to invalidation.

Conclusion: The re-employment was invalid and liable to be quashed. The petitioners were entitled to a fresh DPC, and the eligible petitioner who had been denied consideration was required to be considered along with other eligible candidates.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions succeeded because the impugned re-employment could not stand in the face of non-compliance with the mandatory governing procedure, and the service selection process had to be revisited accordingly.

Ratio Decidendi: When the State has prescribed a mandatory procedure for exceptional re-employment after superannuation, that procedure must be strictly complied with, and an appointment made in breach of it is liable to be struck down as arbitrary and unsustainable.

---