Supreme Court of India delivers verdict in SSE trainee termination dispute.
SC UPHOLDS TERMINATION OF TRAINEE SSE FOR FAILURE IN G&SR EXAM
CASE SUMMARY – In Union of India & Ors. vs. Alok Kumar (2025 INSC 1091), the respondent, appointed as Trainee SSE, was required to complete a 52-week training with a mandatory written test. Despite two attempts, he failed the G&SR examination, leading to termination and recovery of stipend. The Patna High Court set aside the termination, holding no exam was mandated. The Supreme Court reversed, ruling that training completion and exams are compulsory under the Master Circular. While termination was upheld, stipend recovery was disallowed as it resulted from administrative error. The respondent was denied reinstatement.
| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Union of India & Ors. vs. Alok Kumar (2025 INSC 1091) |
| Introduction | Appeal against Patna High Court’s order setting aside termination of an SSE trainee who failed G&SR training. |
| Factual Background | Respondent appointed as Trainee SSE (Electrical/Drawing). Required to complete 52 weeks training. Failed G&SR exam twice despite second attempt. Services terminated; stipend recovery ordered. High Court set aside termination. |
| Legal Issues |
|
| Applicable Law | Master Circular No.29 (1991), Indian Railway Establishment Manual (1989), RBE No.11/2010, Case law: Prafulla Kumar Swain v. Prakash Chandra Misra (1993), Ashok Ram Parhad v. State of Maharashtra (2023). |
| Analysis | Supreme Court held Master Circular mandates written exam post-training. High Court erred in holding no exam required. Departmental exams apply to promotions; training exams apply to recruits. Respondent failed twice unlike others. Recovery of stipend unjustified due to administrative lapse. |
| Conclusion | Termination upheld; stipend recovery set aside. High Court judgment reversed. |
| Current Scenario | Respondent’s reinstatement order by High Court quashed. Union of India’s appeal allowed. Respondent not entitled to SSE post; stipend not recoverable. |
“Recruitment is only an initial process; permanent appointment requires successful training and examination.”
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
READ ALSO – SC RESTORES DAUGHTER’S COPARCENARY RIGHTS UNDER HINDU SUCCESSION ACT 2005
Discover powerful Latin Maxims and Legal Glossary and simplify complex legal terms in seconds.The LawGist ensures exam success with quality Blogs and Articles — Top Legal Picks (TLP), Current Affairs, Recent Supreme Court Judgments, and Step into the world of justice with Courtroom Chronicles. Backed by trusted resources and videos, The LawGist is every Professionals and Aspirant’s first choice. Discover more at thelawgist.org.
