Legal Analysis : Gaurav MehlA & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors

Citation: 2026 INSC 641

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: A Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol & Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh

Date of Decision: June 11, 2026

Nature of Judgment: Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 23061 of 2025 against the judgment dated 29.07.2025 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in LPA No.1259 of 2024 (O&M).

Synopsis of the Judgment

The appellants were appointed in the year 2014 as Clerk-cum-Salesman and Peon-cum-Chowkidar in a Cooperative Society in Haryana pursuant to a public advertisement and selection process. After more than a decade of continuous service, their appointments were annulled on the ground that the decision-making meeting of the Board of Directors on 13.08.2014 violated amended Rule 3 of the Service Rules, 2003, which mandated the compulsory presence and concurrence of the Assistant Registrar Cooperative Societies, Inspector Cooperative Societies and District Manager, HAFED. The Additional Registrar and the Additional Chief Secretary upheld the challenge, and the High Court affirmed. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that while Rule 3 is salutary and mandatory, its violation does not render the entire recruitment process void ab initio where the earlier stages (advertisement and interview) suffered no fundamental defect. The Court distinguished between the three stages of recruitment: (i) advertisement/public notice, (ii) selection process (interview), and (iii) final appointment decision by the Board. The defect in the third stage (absence of official members) was held to be curable and severable from the earlier stages. The Court directed the Cooperative Society to reconvene a meeting of the Board of Directors with the compulsory presence of the official members to reconsider the appointments without reopening the first two stages, and ordered reinstatement of the appellants with continuity of service (without arrears for the period out of service) if found eligible.

1. Basic Information of the Judgment

Case Title: Gaurav MehlA & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Citation: 2026 INSC 641

Civil Appeal No.: Arising out of SLP (C) No. 23061 of 2025

Bench: Division Bench (Justice Sanjay Karol & Justice Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh)

Date of Decision: June 11, 2026

Court: Supreme Court of India (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Impugned Order: Judgment dated 29.07.2025 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in LPA No.1259 of 2024 (O&M) affirming the judgment dated 22.04.2024 of the learned Single Judge in CWP No.23148 of 2017, which had upheld the orders of the statutory authorities annulling the appointments.

2. Legal Framework

Major Laws and Provisions Involved

Haryana Cooperative Societies Act, 1984 – Section 27 (Registrar's power to examine legality of society's actions), Section 36 (acts of cooperative society not to be invalidated by certain defects – procedure, constitution, vacancy, etc.).

Primary Cooperative Marketing-cum-Processing Societies Ltd. Staff Service Rules, 2003 – Rule 3 (powers to make appointment vest with BOD; decision for appointment shall be taken in meeting where presence and concurrence of Assistant Registrar, Inspector and District Manager, HAFED is compulsory), Rule 4 (administrative powers of BOD), Rule 7 (recruitment procedure and reservation), Rule 14(a) (medical fitness certificate from Civil Surgeon), Rule 15 (manner of appointment – advertisement, record, interview, justification), Rule 35 (meeting of Managing Committee: three members form quorum).

Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 14 and 15 (equality and non-discrimination in public employment), Article 136 (special leave to appeal).

Haryana Cooperative Societies Rules, 1989 – Rule 29 (framing of service rules).

Key Precedents Cited and Applied

State of U.P. v. Johri Mal (2004) 4 SCC 714 – Candidates have no role in administrative procedures of recruiting authority; penalising them for institutional lapses violates settled jurisprudence.

Rajasthan Public Service Commission v. Kaila Devi (2018) 12 SCC 101 – Technical lapses not attributable to candidates are held non-fatal; doctrine of curability of procedural irregularities.

Ramjit Singh Kardam v. Sanjeev Kumar (2020) 20 SCC 209 – There can be no equity in favour of appointments made in violation of statutory recruitment rules (cited by respondents).

3. Relevant Facts

The Thanesar Cooperative Marketing-cum-Processing Society Ltd., Kurukshetra (a cooperative society governed b

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.