The court upheld the directions given by the Tribunal based on the authorization for the engagement of manpower for the development of unauthorized colonies.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (DSIIDC) has filed this writ petition impugning order dated 18th May, 2016, passed by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) in OA No. 465/2015 limited to the directions issued in paragraphs 18 and 19. For the sake of convenience, we would reproduce paragraphs 18 and 19, which read as under:-

“18. However, it is to be seen that the applicants initiated the legal proceedings seeking regularization of their services. The Hon’ble High Court noticing that the appointment of the applicants is irregular but not illegal, since they were possessing the requisite educational qualifications and were working against sanctioned posts, directed the respondents to conduct the induction test limited to the contract Junior Engineers and such contract Junior Engineers, who cleared the selection process, be inducted permanently against the posts they are currently holding. It is to be seen that the Hon’ble High Court, while passing the said orders, has not observed that if any of the petitioners failed to clear the selection process, their services, even as contractual Junior Engineers, should be terminated, and the respondents cannot utilise the services of the applicants even on contract basis against the available existing vacancies, even before the respondents fill up all the existing vacancies by way of regular recruitment, as per rules. It is also not the case of the respondents that there are no existing sanctioned vacancies and that there is no work or necessity to engage the applicants on contract basis even.

19. In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, the OA is partly allowed. The impugned Annexure A (Colly.) termination orders dated 08.12.2014 are quashed and the respondents are directed to re-engage the applicants in service within 60 days on the same terms and conditions as they were working prior to the termination orders, till all the existing Junior Engineer (Civil) vacancies are filled up on regular basis. However, the applicants are not entitled for any arrears or benefits for the break period. The respondents are further directed to permit the applicants to participate in the selection process, along with others, if taken up by the respondents to fill up the vacancies on regular basis, by granting appropriate age relaxation, if required. No costs.”

2. It is seen that the claim of the respondents, who were engaged for the first time as Work Assistants/Technical Supervisors between 7th May, 1995 to 1st May, 1998, for regularisation was rejected. The limited relief granted to the respondents, noticing that the respondents had the requisite educational qualifications and were working against sanctioned posts, was that they would be re-engaged in service within 60 days on the same terms and conditions on which they were working prior to the termination order dated 18th December, 2014, till the existing vacancies of Junior Engineer (Civil) were filled up on regular basis. The respondents were not to be paid any arrears or given benefit of the break period.

3. The DSIIDC questioning the directions in paragraphs 18 and 19 quoted above had made conflicting and contradictory assertions in the writ petition on facts. A Division Bench, recording the said discrepancy, vide order dated 28th September, 2016 had directed the petitioner DSIIDC to reconcile and state the true factual position. This order dated 28th September, 2016 reads:-

“1. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays for time to obtain instructions.

2. The case of the petitioner appears to be slightly contradictory. It is submitted that there is no requirement of Junior Engineers and, therefore, it is not necessary for the petitioner Corporation to fill up all vacant posts. At the same time, in ground (M) (page-21), it is averred that it has been decided to fill up all posts on deputation basis. Inference being that the petitio