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

1995 Supreme(SC) 1509

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy And B. L. Hansaria, JJ.
Ashwani Kumar and others - Appellants
Versus
State of Bihar and others - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 10758-59 of 1995 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 12934-35 of 1994) with Civil Appeal Nos. 10760-11058, 11062-66 of 1995 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 13203-13, 13137-40, 13933-34, 14009-30, 14031-36, 14037-42, 14050-67/94 and etc. etc.
Decided On : 16-11-1995

Headnote:

Indian Evidence Act - Section 114 - Appointments to be legal – Tenant – Jurisdiction - After hearing them and considering the record placed before it, the Committee found that did not make any order of appointment on daily- wage basis. It found it difficult to accept even the orders of confirmation. In that view, the Committee found that the initial appointments made by were in violation of the instructions issued by the Government. Therefore, they were found to be illegal appointments. The Committee also found that circumvented the rules by making adjustment by transfer without verifying the qualifications, eligibility or disclosing previous places whereat the candidates appointed had worked and dates of their appointment and by transferring them to the respective places by cyclostyled orders. He directed the District Medical Officers to verify their credentials and then to appoint them temporarily. As stated earlier, the Committee also noted that the third category of persons appointed were by producing fabricated orders of appointment. Consequently, it directed to cancel all the appointments made by = - On receipt of the report and on its consideration, the Government found them to be invalid and illegal and all the appointments were cancelled. When their legality was questioned in the writ petitions filed under Article 226, the High Court upheld the Government action. Thus these appeals by special leave – Held, Court have given my considered thought to this all important aspect of the case and, according to me, as about 2500 persons could have been appointed by and as there are materials on record to show that regular appointments had also been made (how many, we do not know), and as it is not possible to know who the regularly appointed persons were, facts permit to say that the appellants before us, whose number is 1363, may be among those who were regularly appointed. I have thought it fit to take this view because of the mandate in Article 21 of the Constitution, which would not permit taking away livelihood of so many of the incumbents unless satisfied that they were among the persons who had not been legally and validly appointed. It deserves to be pointed out that as the State has taken away the rights which had come to inhere in the appellants, the primary burden is on the State to establish that illegality had been committed in giving appointments to the appellants. This burden the State has undoubtedly failed to discharge qua the appellants. The benefit of the same had to be made available to them – Court would further say that in such matters there is (some) justification to keep human consideration also in mind, as urged by referring Chief Justice, Karnataka High Court - In that case this Court, despite having regarded the impugned appointment as invalid, refused to recognize consequence which would have involved uprooting of the appellants, because of which it adopted a humanitarian approach, as it was felt that the appellants "seem to deserve justice ruled by mercy. "Not only this, the Court went to the extent of giving allthe benefits of past service after stating that the appellants shall be treated to have been regularly appointed. The learned counsel prays that we may view the cases at hand also similarly inasmuch as virtually all the appellants are from poorer section of the society and it may well be that the concerned families have no other bread-earner. I have felt inclined to bear this aspect also in mind, albeit tangentially. Having noted that materials on record do not permit to hold that the appellants were among those who were appointed beyond the sanctioned strength, my con\science does not permit to punish them for the wrong or sin which might have been committed by others - Order Accordingly

JUDGMENT :

K. Ramaswamy, J. :- Leave granted.

2. This bunch of appeals pertains to 1363 employees, viz., Clerks (Class III) and Attendants (Class IV). All the cases arise from judgments of Division Bench of the Patna High Court dated May 6, 1994 in C.W.J.C. No. 5163/93 and batch. The principal villain behind the scene is one Dr. A. A. Mallick, Deputy Director, Health Department of the Government of Bihar, in charge of Tuberculosis. He was Director of the Tuberculosis Centre at Patna. Eradication of Tuberculosis was taken up as a part of 20-Point Programme in Planned Expenditure. The activities in the Tuberculosis Centre at Patna were extended to various districts. Since Mallick happened to be the Director of the Centre, he was made Deputy Director of the Scheme. The Government had also issued directions to the District Medical Officers to abide by the instructions of Mallick in implementation of the programme. He was made the Chairman of the Selection Committee constituted by the Government consisting of himself, Assistant Director of Filaria and the senior officer representing Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes to recruit 2250 posts of Class III and Class IV employees created to implement the Scheme in addition to around 800 to 900 staff in Patna Centre in all categories. Taking advantage thereof, the undisputed fact is that, he had appointed around 6000 (as found by the Committee) while the Government asserts them to be approximately 7000. Be that as it may, not less than 6000 persons were appointed by Mallick without any written orders. He directed many of them to be adjusted by transfer by District Medical Officers and some of them had produced fabricated appointment orders. He shuffled their payment of salaries like musical chairs by turns. Another device adopted in the sordid episode was to make the employees go on strike and when some sensitive M.L.As. raised the question, on the floor of the State Legislative Assembly, of illegal appointments made by Mallick, the Government initially swallowed the appointments to be legal and had justified his action to be valid. Later, when facts themselves proved their faulty admission, they made amends before the Assembly and the Government made an elaborate statement apprising the House that the information furnished earlier was not correct.

3. Due to the agitation, the Director and Joint Secretary to the Government, Health Department had issued directions to regularise the services of daily rated Class III and Class IV employees. Taking aid thereof, it is claimed that regularisation of many of them including most of the appellants, was made. When alarming bells rang around portals of Patna High Court, filing petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking payment of salaries, the High Court, though initially in some cases directed to enquire into the cases and to pay salaries, later found it difficult to cope up with the situation. So it directed the Government to constitute an enquiry committee to find out whether the appointments made by Mallick were valid and if so, to pay salary to such employees.

4. In the meanwhile, the Government also directed the Vigilance Department to enquire into the matter and on May 7, 1991, the Vigilance Department in its report pointed out that Mallick had violated the rules of recruitment and in collusion with other officers had appointed daily-rated Class III and Class IV employees. Pursuant to the direction of the High Court, a Screening Committee was constituted which sought to serve notice on the employees. When the Deputy Director went to the Centre at Patna to serve the notice on the employees, he was man-handled resulting in an ugly law and order situation. In consequence, notices were published on two different dates in different newspapers inviting submission of the claims by all the employees appointed by Mallick, together with supporting material justifying their appointments. Different dates of hearing by the Committee were staggered.

    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