Judgment

S.B. Sinha, J.—The Appellant No. 2 herein is a statutory body constituted under the Nursing Council Act (for short "the Act"). It exercises statutory powers. Section 13 of the Act reads as under :

"13. Inspections:—(1) The Executive Committee may appoint such number of inspectors whether from among members of the Council or otherwise, as it deems necessary to inspect any institution recognised as a training institution, and to attend examinations held for the purpose of granting any recognised qualification or recognised higher qualification.

(2) Inspectors appointed under this section shall report to the Executive Committee on the suitability of the institution for the purposes of training and on the adequacy of the training therein, or as the case may be on the sufficiency of the examinations.

(3) The Executive Committee shall forward a copy of such report to the authority or institution concerned, and shall also forward copies with the remarks, if any, of the authority or institution concerned thereon to the Central Government and to the State Government and State Council of the State in which the authority or institution is situated."

2. Five posts of Zonal Inspector were created by the Executive Council in terms of a Resolution dated 22.2.1965. The Appellant No. 1 herein was approached by the Appellant No.2 for creation of five permanent posts of Inspector but only one regular post of Inspector was sanctioned. The Respondent herein was appointed as an Inspector on an adhoc basis on 1.6.1992. He was later on selected on a regular basis. His selection was approved by the General Body of the Council in the year 1994. She was put on probation for a period of two years. On 3.4.1996, she was asked to submit a self-appraisal report. However, without waiting for the receipt thereof, recommendation was made on or about 8.4.1996 by the Departmental Promotion Committee that her services might not be confirmed. On 9.4.1996, the Respondent submitted her self-appraisal report. On the same day, her services were terminated with immediate effect by an order of the President of the Council although admittedly the Executive Council alone had jurisdiction in relation thereto. A writ petition was filed by the Respondent questioning the said order of termination dated 9.4.1996. Only during pendency of the said writ petition, the Executive Committee ratified the order passed by the President of the Council dated 8.5.1996 which was in turn ratified by the General Body on 5.7.1996. An affidavit was filed by the Appellant herein stating :

(i) the post of Inspector to which the respondent was appointed was created not under S. 13 but under S. 8(2)(d) of the INC Act. 1947;

(ii) on 08.04.96 the said post was proposed to be abolished by the EC. However, the post has not been abolished but has been converted into post of Assistant Secretary (Nursing) in the same pay scale as Inspector (Rs. 2000-3500); and

(iii) the necessary sanction/approval from GOI is awaited for filling the said post of Assistant Secretary (Nursing).

3. From the said affidavit, therefore, it would appear that merely nomenclature of the post of Inspector had been changed to that of Assistant Secretary. In support of the said allegation, no record was produced. The learned Single Judge of Delhi High Court upon hearing the parties reserved its judgment on 16.2.1998.

4. Before the judgment could be pronounced, the Government of India issued a letter dated 17th June, 1999 directing the Council to issue order of abolition of the post of inspector in the following terms :

"The undersigned is directed to enclose a copy of the statement regarding vacant posts in your organization. The posts mentioned in the statement were lying vacant for more than one year as per communication received from your office and as such are deemed abolished as per instructions of Ministry of Finance.

It is requested that formal orders of abolition may be issued in respect of the vacant posts which are deemed aboli