Back
2019 Supreme(Del) 41
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S. MURALIDHAR, SANJEEV NARULA, JJ.
DR. PRANAB BAISHYA & ORS. - Appellants
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - Respondents
LPA Nos. 225, 278, 288 of 2017
Decided On : 21-01-2019
For the Appellants :Mr. Arunabh Chowdhary with Mr. Karma Dorjee, Mr. Vaibhav Tomar & Ms. Shruti Choudhry, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC, Mr. J.K. Singh with Mr. Harsh Pandit, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of cancelling the entire selection process based on widespread irregularities, and the importance of segregating the tainted from the untainted candidates.
Headnote:
Appointment Cancellation - Irregularities in Selection Process - Rule 3.5 of Service, Recruitment & Promotion Rules of NCCT - Lack of Specific Recruitment Rules - Cancellation of Entire Selection Process - Segregation of Tainted and Untainted Candidates
Fact of the Case:
The Respondent, National Council for Cooperative Training (NCCT), cancelled the appointments of the Appellants as Lecturers due to irregularities in the selection process. An enquiry committee found several irregularities in the recruitment process, leading to the cancellation of the appointments.
Finding of the Court:
The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions of the Appellants, holding that the entire selection process was vitiated and it was not possible to segregate the tainted from the untainted candidates. The court concluded that the cancellation of the entire selection process was valid based on the irregularities found in the enquiry report.
Issues: The main issue was whether the cancellation of the entire selection process and the appointments of the Appellants was justified based on the irregularities found in the recruitment process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the cancellation of the entire selection process was valid, as the irregularities in the recruitment process were widespread and went to the root of the matter, making it impossible to segregate the tainted from the untainted candidates.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge and directed the restoration of the appointments of certain Appellants, while issuing show cause notices to the remaining Appellants to provide them with an opportunity to respond to the alleged ineligibility.
S. Muralidhar, J.
1. These appeals are directed against a common judgment dated 20th March 2017 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions of the Appellants.
Background Facts
2. The background facts are that Respondent No.1 National Council for Cooperative Training (NCCT), which is responsible for training for personnel working in the cooperative sector, published an advertisement in the Employment News dated 2nd – 8th October 2010 to recruit Lecturers in 20 institutions located in various parts of the country which offer training programmes.
3. Each of the Appellants applied for the post of Lecturer. Having been found eligible, they were called for interviews in between 22nd and 26th February 2011 at two centres i.e. Delhi (for Northern India) and Hyderabad (for Southern India).
4. Following the interview each of the Appellants were selected and offered appointment to the post of Lecturer amongst the 20 institutes of Cooperative Management run by the NCCT on 14th March, 2011. Inter alia among the terms and conditions of appointment it was mentioned that they would be on probation for a period of two years from the date of joining and that the period of probation could be further extended at the discretion of the NCCT. It was further mentioned in condition (vii) that if during the period of probation the performance was not found satisfactory the candidate’s services may be terminated with one month’s notice by the NCCT without assigning any reason. They were asked to report for duties by March 2011 as their appointments were with effect from 1st April, 2011.
Report of the Enquiry Committee
5. It appears that on 16th May, 2011 the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation ordered an enquiry into the allegations of irregularities in the appointment of Lecturers in the NCCT, as certain complaints with respect to gross illegalities in the selection process of Lecturers were received and subsequently a committee was appointed by the Department. The enquiry committee scrutinised the dossiers of the selected candidates. It also scrutinised some applications of candidates who were shortlisted for the interview but were not selected as well as the applications of some other candidates who were not selected even for the interviews. The different stages of the written process were also closely examined. An enquiry report dated 10th June 2011 was submitted. Inter alia it noted as under :
“43 candidates were called for interview before the SRC on 21.02.2011 and 32 candidates appeared for the same.
44 candidates were called for interview before the SRC on 22.02.2011 and 37 candidates appeared for the same.
65 candidates were called for interview before the SRC on 26.02.2011 and 50 candidates appeared.
Consolidated proceedings of the meetings of the SRC held on 21st, 22nd & 26th February, 2011 (Annexure - 7) were prepared and signed by the above mentioned members of the SRC who attended the meetings. The consolidated proceedings of the SRC were signed by a non member namely Shri R.K. Singh who also attended the aforesaid meetings of the SRC.
The proceedings of the SRC referred to above were undated.”
6. The irregularities noted in the report were as under :
“3. Irregularities
The inquiry revealed that a large number of irregularities were committed during the recruitment process. Some of the irregularities that were noticed during the enquiry are highlighted below :
(a) As per Rule 3.5 of Service. Recruitment & Promotion Rules of the NCCT, approval of the Council is required for relaxing the eligibility requirement of minimum teaching experience of three years. However, in the instant case, such relaxation was granted by the Chairman, NCCT as mentioned above.
(b) The advertisement for recruitment of lecturer did not require candidates to submit applications with photographs pasted thereon. This is a very serious lapse. All recruitment/selection bodies in the country such as the UPSC, Staff Selection Commission, Railway Recrui
