Back
2006 Supreme(Cal) 32
High Court Of Calcutta
Pratap Kumar Ray
DHANANJOY PRADHAN - Appellant
Versus
CHAIRMAN, EGRA MUNICIPALITY - Respondent
W. P. 17776 Of 2001
Decided On : 01/19/2006
A.B.CHATTERJEE, AMARESH BAG, DEBASHIS DAS, FAZLID HAGUE, K.K.MITRA, K.N.NABI
Headnote:
WEST BENGAL MUNICIPAL ACT, 1993 - SECTION 54(3A) - APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES - PROCEDURE - SELECTION FROM EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE OR OTHER METHODS DETERMINED BY STATE GOVERNMENT - IDENTIFICATION OF POSTS OUTSIDE AMBIT OF MUNICIPAL SERVICE COMMISSION - APPLICABILITY OF CIRCULAR LETTER ISSUED BY STATE GOVERNMENT - CIRCULAR LETTER NOT A RECRUITMENT RULE - NON-IDENTIFICATION OF POSTS - CIRCULAR LETTER HAS NO APPLICABILITY - APPEARANCE OF PETITIONERS IN INTERVIEW AS PER INTERIM COURT ORDER - SELECTION ON MERIT - APPOINTMENT TO BE MADE.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, appointed in different posts in Egra Municipality, approached the court when regularization of their service was denied. The Municipality invited applications from candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange for filling up 35 posts, but subsequently, the Chairman informed that 10 posts were already filled up and only 32 posts would be considered for appointment. The Director of Local Bodies sent his representative to the proposed Selection Committee for selection of candidates. A panel was finalized by the Selection Committee, wherein the names of the petitioners were empanelled on merit in addition to the names of some sponsored candidates.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioners, though not sponsored from the Employment Exchange, were allowed to participate in the interview as per the interim order of the court, subject to the result of the writ petition. The court found that the petitioners were selected on merit following the recruitment process. The court relied on various judgments of the Supreme Court and the Calcutta High Court to hold that the non-sponsorship of the petitioners' names from the Employment Exchange would not vitiate their selection on merit.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners, who were not sponsored from the Employment Exchange, could be considered for appointment to the posts in question? 2. Whether the circular letter issued by the State Government providing the mode of invitation of names from the local Employment Exchange was applicable in the instant case? 3. Whether the appearance of the petitioners in the interview as per the interim order of the court, though they were not sponsored candidates, was valid?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The posts in question were not identified under the relevant Municipal Act as posts whose selection would not be done by the Municipal Service Commission, a condition precedent to call names from the Exchange as per the said statute. 2. The circular letter issued by the State Government providing the mode of invitation of names from the local Employment Exchange was not a recruitment rule and had no applicability in the instant case, as the posts were not identified outside the ambit of the Municipal Service Commission. 3. The appearance of the petitioners in the interview as per the interim order of the court, though they were not sponsored candidates, was valid, as the court had the intention to inject societal and humane values in the letters of the statute under the special facts of the case.
Final Decision: The writ applications were allowed. The interim order passed by the court in all the writ applications was confirmed by the final judgment of the court. The respondents were directed to declare the result of the selection process formally and to give appointment of the petitioners in the posts in question within two weeks from the date of the judgment. The petitioners were to continue in their respective temporary posts with service benefits till the appointment letters were issued and they joined the posts in question.
( 1 ) THESE writ applications were originally moved praying the following reliefs:" (a) a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 1 to issue an interview letter in favour of the petitioner to the post of Work Sarkar, Group-C, Egra Municipality, Post Office: egra, District: Midnapore which will be held on 11th November,2001 or any subsequent date in the office of the Municipality. (b) a writ of the nature of certiorari directing the respondents to produce or cause to be produce all relevant documents in connection with the case of the petitioner before this Hon'ble court so that the conscionable justice may be done to the petitioner. (c) Rule NISI in terms of the prayer (a and b) above. (d) to issue an order injunction restraining the respondents Nos. 1 and 4 not to hold any interview to the post of Work Sarkar, Group-C, egra Municipality, Midnapore on 11th November, 2001 or any subsequent date without issuing interview letter in favour of the petitioner to the aforesaid post till disposal of the application. (e) Ad-interim order of injunction in terms of prayers (d and e) above, (f) make any other appropriate writ or writs order or orders to which the petitioner is entitled. (g) to make the Rule absolute. (h) pass such other or further order or orders as your Lordship may deem fit and proper. (i) Cost or Costs. "
( 2 ) BY the interim order dated 9th November, 2001, Ashim Kumar banerjee, J. directed the appearance of all the petitioners in the interview with a rider that "if the writ petitioner succeeds, the said appointment will abide by the result of the writ petition". The order dated 9th November, 2001 aforesaid speaks to this effect:"the writ petitioner is working as a Store Keeper on casual basis in Egra Municipality. The said post is now being filed up through regular recruitment process. Hence I direct the said Municipality to allow the writ petitioner to participate at the interview for the said post provided the writ petitioner is eligible for the said post. In case the writ petitioner succeeds, the said appointment will abide by the result of the writ petition. Let affidavit-in-opposition be filed by 19. 11. 2001 and reply thereto, if any, be filed by 29. 11. 2001. Let this matter appear in the monthly list of December, 2001 before the appropriate regular Bench. Let plain copy of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant registrar (CT.) be given to the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties on usual undertaking. "
( 3 ) DURING pendency of the writ application under changed situation affidavits have been exchanged by the parties wherefrom it appears that petitioners along with other candidates sponsored from Employment exchange, were duly, interviewed by the Selection Committee following the Recruitment Rules and thereby petitioners were empanelled for employment and as the writ applications are pending, no formal appointment letters have been issued.
( 4 ) IT is the case of the writ petitioners that they were appointed in different posts respectively as detailed in respective writ petitions when the Municipality was setup due to the emergent need of the Municipality to provide civic facilities to citizens. It is true that such appointments were not made following any Recruitment Rule as at the material time there were no sanctioned posts and the appointments were made as per choice of the Municipal Authority. As the regularization of service after the posts were created and sanctioned by the competent authority was denied, the petitioners approached the Writ Court praying their appearance in the interview along with sponsored candidates for consideration of their case on merit. In pursuance thereof, petitioners appeared and now they are selected candidates on merit.
( 5 ) FROM the Affidavit-in-Reply filed by the writ petitioners affirmed on 15th September. 2003, it is now admitted fact in view of the documents annexed, which has not been denied by the respond
