Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
NANI TAGIA, J.
Shri Tatu Ruyi, S/o Tage Ruyi – Appellant
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh – Respondent
WP(C) 635 of 2018
Decided on : 04-08-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14 & 16 – Service Law - Post of W/C Khallasi (Adhoc) – Challenged the Order - Petitioner was appointed, in violation of Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India, thereby, depriving other eligible candidates to participate in the selection process, had such selection process been undertaken by the respondent authorities after post was put to an advertisement and selection held pursuant thereto. Para 16
Finding of Court : If it is admitted and indisputable factual position, one and only conclusion possible and permissible in the facts and circumstances of case is that the appointment of petitioner cannot be sustained in law for having been made in violation of Constitutional scheme of appointment to post of W/C Khallasi (Adhoc), namely Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India – Court not inclined to interfere with impugned order, dated , issued by Superintending Engineer (E), A. P. Electrical Circle – V, Department of Power, Ziro, vide No. , even if said order has been issued without notice to petitioner, for reason that in event, order dated is interfered with by Court, it will result in restoration of yet another illegal order of appointment, dated.
Result : Writ petition stands dismissed
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. L. Perme, learned Standing counsel for the Power Department, representing the respondents no. 1 & 3.
2. This writ petition has been filed, challenging the order, dated 09.10.2018, issued by the Superintending Engineer (E), A.P. Electrical Circle – V, Department of Power, Ziro, vide No. SE/APEC-V/EWC-1/2017-18/1298-1300, whereby, the appointment of the petitioner, namely, Shri Tatu Ruyi, to the post of W/C Khallasi (Adhoc), appointed vide the Office order No. SE/APEC-V/EWC-19/2017-18/1953-57, dated 25.01.2018, issued by the Superintending Engineer (E), A.P. Electrical Circle-V, Department of Power, Ziro, from Direct Quota has been cancelled in compliance with the Office Memorandum No. CE(P)/CEZ/EWC/2018-19/1404, Dated 31.08.2018, received from the Chief Engineer (P), Central Electrical Zone, Department of Power, Itanagar, contending that the impugned order, dated 09.10.2018, has been issued without notice to the petitioner.
3. The respondents no. 1, 2, 3 & 4 have filed the counter-affidavit, wherein, it has been stated that the impugned order dated 09.10.2018 has been issued by the Superintending Engineer (E), A. P. Electrical Circle – V, Department of Power, Ziro, cancelling the appointment of the petitioner in the post of W/C Khallasi (Adhoc) dated 25.01.2018, on the basis of the Office Memorandum No. CE(P)/CEZ/EWC/2018-19/1404, Dated 31.08.2018, issued by the Chief Engineer (P), Central Electrical Zone, Department of Power, Itanagar and the same has been annexed as Annexure ‘C’ to the counter-affidavit.
4. The aforesaid Office Memorandum No. CE(P)/CEZ/EWC/2018-19/1404, Dated 31.08.2018, issued by the Chief Engineer (P), Central Electrical Zone, Department of Power, Itanagar, is quoted hereinbelow, for ready reference:
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER (POWER) CENTRAL ELECTRICAL ZONE
DEPARTMENT OF POWER VIDYUT BHAWAN, ITANAGAR
NO. CE (P) CEZ/EWC/2018-19/1404-06 Dated 31st August 2018
MEMORANDUM
Whereas on recommendation of Hon’ble Minister (Power) on the note of the Hon’ble MLA, 26th ST Assembly Constituency, Dumporijo this office had issued a letter vide No. CE (P)/CEZ/ESTT/W/C-Misc/Part/2017-18/1748-49 Dtd 16/01/2018 for considering appointment of Shri Tatu Ruyi under direct recruitment quota.
Whereas the aforementioned letter is not an approval order issued to the appointing authority to directly appoint on Shri Tatu Ruyi as W/C Khallashi (Adhoc) without conducting Trades Test/Interview.
Whereas on scrutiny it is observed that the appointing authority has misinterpreted the letter issued by this office as an approval letter for direct appointment.
Whereas the letter issued by this office says ‘the appointment may be considered under direct recruitment quota’’ and is not a approval order for appointment under direct recruitment quota without undergoing recruitment norms.
Whereas after through scrutiny the appointment order is found have lapses, therefore aforementioned appointment order of Shri Tatu Ruyi is fit case for CANCELLATION/TERMINATION.
Whereas SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (E), ZIRO being the appointing authority shall issue formal Cancellation/Termination order of appointment of Shri Tatu Ruyi W/C Kallshi (Adhoc). After cancellation/termination of aforementioned appointment order, the post fallen vacant shall be continued to be remain for direct recruitment quota.
Chief Engineer(P)
Central Electrical Zone, Dept. of Power.
5. On perusal of the Office Memorandum, dated 31.08.2018, issued by the Chief Engineer (P), Central Electrical Zone, Department of Power, Itanagar, it is noticed that on the recommendation of the Hon’ble Minister (Power) on the note of the Hon’ble MLA, 26th ST Assembly Constituency Dumporijo, the Office of the Chief Engineer (P), Central Electrical Zone, Department of Power, Itanagar, had issued a letter vide No. CE(P)/CEZ/ESTT/W/C-Misc/Part/2017-18/1748-49, dated 16.01.2018, for considering the appointment of
Point of Law : Court need not issue a writ merely because there is violation of the natural justice, not because it is not necessary to observe natural justice but because Courts do not issue futile ....
An appointment made in violation of prescribed rules is void ab initio; no notice or hearing is required for cancellation as per legal principles governing natural justice.
The court affirmed that an appointment made in violation of recruitment rules is void ab initio, and principles of natural justice do not apply when cancellation is based on undisputed facts.
The dismissal of the petitioner was upheld as legal and justified, with the court affirming the supervisory nature of its review under Article 227, emphasizing the lack of procedural errors in the Tr....
Point of Law : Court quashing an administrative decision without substituting its own decision, and is to be contrasted with an appeal where the appellate tribunal substitutes its own decision on the....
The distinction between irregular and illegal appointments, the application of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, and the consideration of equity in public employment cases.
: Cancelling a proper selection based engagement of a person to a public post and his consequent serving duty as well on the pretext that the person had come to report his joining after delay of few ....
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
