In his public interest writ petition, advocate P Pugalendhi submitted that India was a country known for unemployment. It was common knowledge that thousands of young persons applied for a few posts of junior assistants in government service.

Under Article 41 of the Constitution, the State should make effective provision for securing the right to work, education and public assistance in cases of unemployment.

Strangely, the State had ignored the said Directive Principle of the State Policy and introduced a new mode of recruitment of the retired government and quasi-government servants to occupy the sanctioned posts in the administrative as well as the technical cadre by issuing the GO, the petitioner said.

The State had not applied its mind to the plight of thousands of unemployed youth whose names were in the live registers of various employment exchanges in the State. As on March 31, 2004, there were 49,85,289 people registered with the exchanges awaiting an opportunity to work in the government.

When eligible and qualified young persons were available in the State in abundance, the proposal to appoint retired persons on contract basis was a mystery. The GO violated Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution, the petitioner contended and urged the court to strike it down.