SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(SC) 153

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BEFORE P.B. SAWANT AND G.N. RAY, JJ.
DR M.A. HAQUE AND OTHERS
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS.
I.A. No. 1 of 1992 in Writ Petition No. 1165 of 1986{Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India}
Decided on 18-2-1993
Advocates appeared:
M.C. Bhandare, P.P. Rao and N.N. Goswamy, Senior Advocates (Ms C.K. Sucharita, Ms Shashi Kiran, Ms Manjula Gupta, R. Sasiprabhu, V.K. Verma, Raj Kumar Gupta, for P.C. Kapur, Advocates, with them) for the appearing parties.

Advocates:
C.K.Suchitra, M.C.BHANDARE, Manjula Gupta, N.N.GOSWAMY, P.C.KAPUR, P.P.Rao, R.SASIPRABHU, RAJ GUPTA, SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, V.K.VARMA

Headnote:

Constitution of India - Article 32, 309 - Supernumerary posts - Vacancies unfilled - Applicants are some of the Medical Officers who were recruited by the railways on ad hoc basis as Assistant Divisional Medical Officers - They were appointed as such ad hoc employees by way of a stopgap arrangement pending the regular recruitment to the said posts through the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC for short), according to the rules. It appears that although from time to time the UPSC recruited candidates on regular basis, there remained some vacancies unfilled, either because the doctors recruited were less in number than the number of vacancies since suitable candidates were not available or some of those who were selected did not join the service or between date of advertisement by the UPSC and that of empanelling, some more vacancies occurred. Whatever the reasons, the fact was that even after the UPSC undertook the exercise of recruiting the doctors from time to time – Held, pertains to the Central Government Health Services which has a larger component both at the initial and promotional stages - Course adopted by this Court to direct creation of supernumerary promotional posts at every higher promotional stage there, may not be feasible in the medical service in the Railways - Creation of supernumerary posts has its own limitations, both physical and financial. The burden of additional posts even when they are not necessary and cannot be accommodated, is not easy to carry. We are, therefore, of the view that the direction given in Dr Rawani case (1992) 1 SCC 331 has to be confined to the special facts of that case and cannot be extended to other cases. In any case, this Court should not give any such direction to the Railways. If, however, the Railways decide to follow that course, they can do so and nothing prevents them from doing it. We would rather refrain from creating a precedent by giving such directions - Court direct that the seniority of the direct recruits - both outsiders and insiders should be determined according to the dates of their regular appointment through the UPSC and petitioner-applicants should be placed in the seniority list after those direct recruits who are recruited till this date. Among themselves, their seniority will be governed by the dates of their initial appointment - Interlocutory application is disposed

JUDGMENT

SAWANT, J.—The petitioner-applicants are some of the Medical Officers who were recruited by the railways on ad hoc basis as Assistant Divisional Medical Officers between 1968 and October 1, 1984. They were appointed as such ad hoc employees by way of a stopgap arrangement pending the regular recruitment to the said posts through the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC for short), according to the rules. It appears that although from time to time the UPSC recruited candidates on regular basis, there remained some vacancies unfilled, either because the doctors recruited were less in number than the number of vacancies since suitable candidates were not available or some of those who were selected did not join the service or between the date of advertisement by the UPSC and that of the empanelling, some more vacancies occurred. Whatever the reasons, the fact was that even after the UPSC undertook the exercise of recruiting the doctors from time to time, some vacancies always remained unfilled. The result was that every time the petitioner-applicants and others like them were continued on ad hoc basis as a stopgap arrangement till the next recruitment by the UPSC. It may be mentioned in this connection that the ad hoc appointees were always at liberty to appear before the UPSC for their regular recruitment. Some of them in fact did so appear and were selected; others like the petitioner-applicants either failed to be selected or did not care to appear. The fact, however, remains that the petitioner-applicants and others like them continued to serve on ad hoc basis since 1968. Hence they filed writ petitions in this Court for their regularisation in service. By an order dated September 24, 1987 passed in the case of Dr A.K. Jain v. Union of India {1987 Supp SCC 497, 500, this Court directed as follows:

"(1) The services of all doctors appointed either as Assistant Medical Officers or as Assistant Divisional Medical Officers on ad hoc basis up to October 1, 1984 shall be regularised in consultation with the Union Public Service Commission on the evaluation of their work and conduct on the basis of their confidential reports in respect of a period subsequent to October 1, 1982. Such evaluation shall be done by the Union Public Service Commission. The doctors so regularised shall be appointed as Assistant Divisional Medical Officers with effect from the date from which they have been continuously working as Assistant Medical Officer/Assistant Divisional Medical Officer. The railway shall be at liberty to terminate the services of those who are not so regularised. If the services of any of the petitioners appointed prior to October 1, 1984 have been terminated except on resignation or on disciplinary grounds, he shall be also considered for regularisation and if found fit his services shall be regularised as if there was not break in the continuity of service but without any back wages.

(2) The petitions of the Assistant Medical Officers/Assistant Divisional Medical Officers appointed subsequent to October 1, 1984 are dismissed. But we however direct that the Assistant Divisional Medical Officers who may have been now selected by the Union Public Service Commission shall first be posted to the vacant posts available wherever they may be. If all those selected by the UPSC cannot be accommodated against the available vacant posts they may be posted to the posts now held by the doctors appointed on ad hoc basis subsequent to October 1, 1984 and on such posting the doctor holding the post on ad hoc basis shall vacate the same. While making such postings the principle of last come, first go shall be observed by the Railways on zonal basis. If any doctor who is displaced pursuant to the above direction is willing to serve in any other zone where there is a vacancy he may be accommodated on ad hoc basis in such vacancy.

(3) All Assistant Medical Officers/Assistant Divisional Medical Officers working on ad hoc basis shall be paid the




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top