Regularisation of casual employees does not mean that they be permanently employed in the State service irrespective of the fact as to whether their exists any vacancy or not.

S.B.Sinha and Ram Nandan Prasad JJ.

1. This writ application is directed against appointment of respondent Nos. 5 to 8 made by Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Science (respondent No. 1).

2. The principal points upon which the writ application is based are that the said appointment have been made in violation of the Circular which is contained in Annexure-G to the counter affidavit inasmuch as the constitution of the Selection Committee was illegal as well as on the ground that in terms of Annexure-13 to the supplementary affidavit, the State of Bihar allegedly directed the respondent No. 1 to regularise the services of the petitioner.

3. The fact of the matter is that the petitioner had been working as a Typist on daily wages from the year, 1987. In 1988, some posts of Steno Typist and Stenographer were advertised wherein the minimum qualification prescribed was matriculate or its equivalent and a speed of 80 words per minute in Stenography and 100 words in English and 40 words in Hindi Typing. However, preference was to be given to those persons having knowledge in Hindi Short Hand and Typewriting. The petitioner along with other eligible candidates appeared in the said test but was not selected.

4. By reason of the impugned order, which is contained in Annexure-5 series, the respondent Nos. 5 to 8 were appointed in the said posts by the respondent No. 1.

5. Mr. Mathur, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner firstly submitted that the Selection Committee was inter alia required to be consisting of person including a nominee of the State Government in order to represent the weaker sections which nomination was done by the State of Bihar by virtue of a letter dated 11.8.1989 (Annexure-8) although the selection committee held its meeting earlier thereto and as such the constitution of Selection Committee being illegal, its acts of recommending the names of respondent Nos. 5 to 8 for the purpose of appointment in the posts of Stenographer and Steno Typist must also be held to be illegal. Mr. Mathur accordingly contended that in any event, the State of Bihar which exercises a control in respect of management of the respondent No. 1 institution in terms of Sec. 24 of the Indira Gandhi Medical Institute Act, 1984, having directed the respondent No. 1 to regularise the appointment of employees being one daily wages in terms of Annexure-13, the petitioner should have been appointed in the said post.

6. Mr. I.K. Saran, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, on the other hand, submitted in terms of the rules governing appointment in the said institution, all appointments have to be done by open advertisement. The learned Counsel further submitted that respondent No. 1 having followed the procedure of appointment by advertising for the post, committed no illegality. It was further pointed out that the petitioner was over age and further as the petitioner could not successfully compete with other candidates, he was found not fit for the appointment in the said post. It was further pointed out that the composition of Screening Committee and the Selection Committee was done in accordance with law and Dr. N.N. Sinha was designated as Medical Superintendent by office order dated 22.6.1989 which is contained in Annexure-B to the counter affidavit and thus he was eligible to be a member of the Selection Committee. The respondents aforementioned have also brought on records the answer papers in respect of the petitioner. The answer papers of other persons have also been brought on record.

7. From the proceedings of the meeting of the Selection Committee which is contained in Annexure-F to the said counter affidavit, it appears, the said committee, having taken into consideration all aspects of the matter, found the respondent Nos. 5 to 8 fit for appointment. From the said minutes, it further appears that the committee consisted of Dr. S.S. Ambastha, project Director of respondent No.