Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, M.M. SUNDRESH, JJ.
Union of India and Others - Appellants
Versus
N. Murugesan Etc. - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos.2491-2492 of 2021 With Civil Appeal Nos. 2493-2494 of 2021
Decided On : 07-10-2021
Constitution of India,1950 - Articles 226, 32 , 14 and 16 - Karnataka Societies Act, 1960 - Sections 3, 7, 8, 39 and sub-sections (1) or (2) of Section 21 - Appointments Committee of Cabinet - Recruitment and Promotion - Post of Director-General - Central Power Research Institute (CPRI) is an autonomous body registered as a society under the Karnataka Societies Act - It functions under aegis of the Ministry of Power - Object of this institution is to contribute to power sector in country for improved planning, operation and control of power systems while serving as a national level laboratory for undertaking applied research in electrical power engineering besides functioning as an independent national testing, certification authority for electrical equipment, components to ensure reliability in power systems and to innovate and develop new products - There is an extreme element of public interest involved in the functioning of the CPRI - Respondent/writ petitioner initially joined services - On his request, he was voluntarily retired while working as Engineering Officer, Grade-IV - Held, Respondent has not shown any substantial prejudice - Even if one assumes that these materials have not been placed before “ACC – Court believe that there may not be any need for such approval for two reasons - First appellant found that the respondent is not suitable for re-appointment, which was approved by the other authorities - Employer has taken a conscious decision in the interest of society - Secondly, it is not a case of extension in which case maybe the confirmation by “ACC” would have been warranted – Court may also note that all the appellants, including the Hon’ble Minister – Court hold that respondent is not entitled to any extension, the consequential benefits cannot be granted - Appeals are dismissed.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
The case involves a dispute over the appointment and tenure extension of the respondent as Director-General of a public institution, which is an autonomous body functioning under the Ministry of Power with significant public interest involved (!) (!) .
The appointment was made through a process involving a Search-cum-Selection Committee and approval by the highest authorities, including the Prime Minister acting as part of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet ("ACC") (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The appointment was initially for a fixed term of five years, with provisions for reappointment based on suitability, which was subject to approval by the ACC and other authorities (!) (!) .
The respondent was a long-term employee who was voluntarily retired and later appointed on a tenure basis. Despite his performance assessments being satisfactory, the authorities decided not to extend his tenure further and opted for a new recruitment process (!) (!) (!) .
The respondent challenged the termination and the recruitment of a new director through writ petitions, which were dismissed by the courts on grounds including delay, laches, and the absence of statutory rules prohibiting tenure appointments (!) (!) (!) .
The courts emphasized the importance of public interest, discretion of the employer, and the absence of statutory prohibition for tenure-based appointments, supporting the decision to appoint on a tenure basis rather than as a permanent employee (!) (!) .
Principles governing delay, laches, and acquiescence were discussed, highlighting that inordinate delay and conduct indicating waiver or passive acceptance can bar relief. The conduct of the respondent, including multiple representations made late in his tenure, was viewed as conduct that could amount to acquiescence or waiver (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The doctrine of fairness and reasonableness, especially regarding contractual relationships involving the state, was clarified to mean that express terms of a contract cannot be altered or varied by invoking fairness unless explicitly provided by law or applicable rules (!) (!) .
The rules governing the appointment to the post, including the absence of a statutory prohibition on tenure appointments and the discretion of the employer to decide on tenure or regular appointments, were upheld (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Ultimately, the courts held that the respondent was not entitled to continued employment beyond his fixed tenure, and the decision to appoint a new director was made in the public interest with proper adherence to procedural requirements. The appeals filed by the employer were allowed, and the respondent's petitions were dismissed (!) (!) .
Please let me know if you need a more detailed analysis or specific legal advice related to this case.
JUDGMENT :
M.M. SUNDRESH, J.
1. Heard Shri K.M. Nataraj, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellant and Shri Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel for the respondent. There is no representation on behalf of Shri V.S. Nandakumar who has been arrayed as a private respondent and whose recruitment and selection was also challenged by Respondent No.1. We have also perused the documents filed and written submissions placed by the parties.
2. As the present appeals are filed by both contesting parties challenging the same impugned judgment, for the sake of brevity they are disposed of by a common order. Civil Appeal No. 2491-2492 of 2021 is taken up as a lead case, and the parties arrayed thereunder are to be taken in the same manner for the other cases as well.
PRIMARY FACTS:
3. Central Power Research Institute (CPRI) is an autonomous body registered as a society under the Karnataka Societies Act, 1960. It functions under the aegis of the Ministry of Power. The object of this institution is to contribute to the power sector in the country for improved planning, operation and control of power systems while serving as a national level laboratory for undertaking applied research in electrical power engineering besides functioning as an independent national testing, certification authority for electrical equipment, components to ensure reliability in power systems and to innovate and develop new products. Thus, there is an extreme element of public interest involved in the functioning of the CPRI.
4. The respondent/writ petitioner initially joined the services of CPRI way back in the year 1984 -05.07.1984. On his request, he was voluntarily retired while working as Engineering Officer, Grade-IV w.e.f. 31.03.2008.
5. By the Office Memorandum dated 08.11.1991, the Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training introduced a procedure which states that for appointment of certain specified posts, the approval of “Appointments Committee of the Cabinet” (“ACC”) consisting of the Hon’ble Prime Minister and Hon’ble Home Minister, would be required. A further Office Memorandum was issued on 03.07.2006, facilitating appointments approved by “ACC” in autonomous institutions. Needless to state, the post of Director-General is one among them.
6. An advertisement was made on 16.05.2009 to fill up the post of Director-General either by direct recruitment or on deputation in tune with CPRI (Pay, Recruitment and Promotion) Rules, 1989 (Working Rule No.1). The respondent had applied for the said post being eligible to be appointed on direct recruitment.
7. The working rule referred to above deals with various categories of officers and personnel along with the mode of recruitment, designation, the scale of pay, and the date of superannuation for the regular employees. For the post of Director-General, there are two modes of recruitments as noted earlier by us. One is by way of deputation, and the other is by direct recruitment. Qualification with respect to age restriction is 55 years for direct recruitment, while the same is extended by one more year for deputation. On the educational qualification part, from the requisite degrees, it would also involve 15 years of experience in the fields mentioned thereunder. A performance review is also mandated on completion of one year of service after appointment as Director-General, in the case of direct recruitment. The evaluation is made by the Search-cum-Selection Committee consisting of experts in the field. The period of deputation is capped at three years, extendable up to five years.
8. From the above, we could gather in clear terms that the post of Director-General carries a very high degree of importance. The fact that the age limit is fixed at 55 years of completion, being the maximum with 15 years of experience also indicates the rationale behind the qualification fixed.
9. The Ministry of Power, after due deliberation on the recommendation made by the Search-cum-Selection Committee in
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
