https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126726 The Supreme Court held that respondents appointed for a fixed period in a project did not have a legal right to regularization as they were temporary employees without compliance with constitutional provisions. The Court emphasized that appointments made without following statutory rules do not confer any right to regularization. The High Court's direction to create posts and regularize services was set aside, reiterating the importance of adhering to legal requirements in public employment. The appeals were allowed, and each party was directed to bear their own costs. en-us Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Jan 2014 12:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126726 The Supreme Court held that respondents appointed for a fixed period in a project did not have a legal right to regularization as they were temporary employees without compliance with constitutional provisions. The Court emphasized that appointments made without following statutory rules do not confer any right to regularization. The High Court's direction to create posts and regularize services was set aside, reiterating the importance of adhering to legal requirements in public employment. The appeals were allowed, and each party was directed to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126726