Back
2024 Supreme(Gau) 1647
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH, KOHIMA BENCH
Parthivjyoti Saikia, J.
Shri. Arvind Singh – Petitioner
Versus
The Union Of India Represented By The Secretary To The Government Of India, Ministry of Agriculture And Farmers Welfare, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C)/38/2023, WP(C)/39/2023
Decided On : 27-11-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: T. B. Jamir, R Alemwati Jamir, I Jamir
For the Respondent:Mr. Yangerwati, CGSC, Mr. Pfosekho Pfotte, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
The doctrine of legitimate expectation mandates fair treatment by the state, ensuring that long-serving contract employees are not arbitrarily denied regularization.
Headnote:
(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ petitions challenging Advertisement No.05/2023 for recruitment of Assistant Horticulture Specialists - Petitioners, having served for 16/17 years on contract, sought regularization of their services - Court emphasized the doctrine of 'legitimate expectation' and fairness in state action - Advertisement quashed as arbitrary and against natural justice principles - Respondents directed to regularize petitioners' services from initial appointment dates. (Paras 26, 28, 29)
(B) Legitimate Expectation - The doctrine requires the state to honor its policy statements and treat citizens fairly, ensuring no arbitrary actions that violate natural justice principles. (Paras 26, 27)
JUDGMENT :
Parthivjyoti Saikia, J.
These two writ petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Advertisement No.05/2023 inviting applications for filling up the Vacancy Nos.23030503311 & 23030502311, one post of Assistant Horticulture Specialist & one post of Horticulture Specialist at Central Institute of Horticulture, Department of Agriculture & Farmer’s Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmer’s Welfare, Government of India, Medziphema, Dimapur, Nagaland.
2. I have heard Mr. T.B. Jamir, the learned counsel appearing for both the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Yangerwati, the learned Central Government Counsel representing the Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4. Mr. Pfosekho Pfotte, learned counsel appears for Respondent No.5.
3. In the year 2006, applications were invited by the Central Institute of Horticulture (CIH) for appointment as Consultants on contract basis for a period not exceeding 12 (twelve) months for undertaking various activities of the CIH. The consolidated pay was fixed at Rs.20,000/-per month. An interview was held for selection of the Consultants (Technical). After completion of the recruitment procedure, both the present petitioners were selected. On 9th August, 2006, the Dy. Commissioner (Hort.) & OSD, CIH (Nagaland) approved the selection of the petitioner Anjani Kumar Singh. His monthly salary was fixed at Rs.20,000/-. Similarly, on 4th July, 2007, the selection of the petitioner Arvind Singh was approved for appointment as Consultant (Technical) on contractual basis for a period of 1(one) year. His salary was fixed at Rs.20,000/-per month.
4. Although both the petitioners were initially appointed for a period of 1(one) year, their appointments were renewed several times till 2023. On some occasions, their salaries were also increased to Rs.25,000/-per month.
5. In the meantime, on 03.12.2020, both the present two petitioners along with some other employees filed a representation before the Additional Commissioner (Hort.-Fruit), Department of Agriculture, Co-operation & Farmer’s Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmer’s Welfare, Government of India, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi praying for absorption of their services as regular employees of CIH.
6. While their representation was still pending before the authority, in the year 2023, the impugned Advertisement No.05/2023 was published by the Union Public Service Commission inviting applications for filling up the posts of Assistant Horticulture Specialists & Horticulture Specialists in CIH, Nagaland.
7. The grievances of the petitioners are that the petitioners Anjani Kumar Singh had already worked for 17 years continuously and Arvind Singh has been working for 16 years continuously. Arvind Singh is now 55 years old and Anjani Kumar Singh is now 52 years old. In this way, Arvind Singh has now 5 years of service left, after which he will retire. Anjani Kumar Singh has 8 years of service left and he would retire after 8 years from now.
8. Both the petitioners have pointed out that for filling up posts of Assistant Horticulture Specialists, the relevant Rule says that 67% shall be directly recruited and 33% by promotion, failing which by deputation (including short term contract).
9. Both the petitioners have submitted that when they were initially appointed as Consultants (Technical), the posts of Assistant Horticulture Specialists was already created. Even then, they were appointed on contract basis, after a regular process of recruitment.
10. For the aforesaid reasons, both the petitioners prayed to quash the aforementioned Advertisement. They also prayed that a direction needs to be issued to the respondents to absorb them permanently in the posts of Horticulture Specialist in CIH pursuant to the letter dated 07.12.2011 issued by the Department of Agriculture & Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
11. The Respondent Nos.1 to 4 have admitted everything in their affidavit-in-opposition. They simply said that since
