SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(HP) 461

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
AJAY MOHAN GOEL, J.
Rakesh Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Another - Respondents
CWP No. 3092 of 2019
Decided On : 13-12-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Aman Parth Sharma.
For the Respondents: Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Mr. Shashi Shirshoo.

The decision not to fill up vacancies is within the domain of the employer, and a successful candidate does not acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed after participating in a selection process, unless there is discrimination or arbitrariness.

Headnote:

Appointment - Welder - Apprentices Act, 1961 - [Apprentices Act, 1961] - The court dismissed the petition seeking appointment as a Welder, holding that the decision not to fill up the vacancies was based on administrative exigency and was not arbitrary or discriminatory. The court cited legal principles established in previous judgments to support its decision.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner participated in the selection process for the post of Welder but was denied appointment by the Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited. The petitioner filed a petition seeking to set aside the decision and restore the selection process.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the decision not to appoint the petitioner as a Welder was based on administrative exigency and was not arbitrary or discriminatory. The court held that the petitioner did not acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed after participating in the selection process.

Issues: The main issue was whether the decision of the respondent-Corporation not to appoint the petitioner as a Welder was arbitrary or discriminatory.

Ratio Decidendi: The court cited legal principles established in previous judgments, emphasizing that a successful candidate does not acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed after participating in a selection process. The court held that the decision not to fill up the vacancies was within the domain of the employer and a Writ Court ordinarily should not interfere unless there is discrimination or arbitrariness.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's claims. The pending miscellaneous application(s) were also disposed of accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

(Ajay Mohan Goel, J.)

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has primarily prayed for the following reliefs:-

“i) In view of the submission made hereinabove it is most humbly prayed that present petition may kindly be allowed and impugned letter dated 1.1.2019 including decision to the effect of cancellation of the selection process of petitioner by the Board of Directors taken 65th meeting may kindly be set-aside and quashed. Further, respondent may kindly be directed to restore the selection process and appoint the petitioner against his respective post.”

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present petition are that advertisement No. 32-2/2016 (Annexure P-1), was issued by the Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission, Hamirpur, in the month of May, 2016, inviting applications inter alia for the post of Welder, three in number, on behalf of the H.P. Power Corporation Limited. The petitioner participated in the selection process and in terms of Press Note Annexure P-4, he was declared to be at No. 1 in the merit in the evaluation process. However, thereafter, vide Annexure P-6, dated 01.01.2019, the Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited intimated the Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission that in light of the decision taken in 65th BOD meeting held on 30.06.2018 and in view of future manpower requirement of HPPCL for its construction stage and Operation and Maintenance Stage Projects, the management of the Corporation has decided to discontinue with the process of recruitment of Welders. Thereafter, in light of Annexure P-6, appointment was not offered to the petitioner or any other person. As per the petitioner, despite the denial of the appointment to the petitioner on account of reasons spelled out in Annexure P-6, another advertisement was issued by the respondent-Corporation, which included the post of Welder, i.e. Annexure P-7 and in this background that the petition was filed by the petitioner seeking the reliefs prayed for.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the decision of the respondent-Corporation as was communicated vide impugned communication dated 01.2019 is arbitrary for the reason that on one hand the petitioner was denied appointment on the ground that the Corporation decided to discontinue with the process of recruitment of Welders in HPPCL in view of its future manpower requirement and on the other hand, vide Annexure P-7, it was recruiting manpower. This as per the learned Counsel was completely contradictory to the contents of Annexure P-6. Learned Counsel also referred to Annexure P-R1 appended with the rejoinder filed to the reply filed by the respondent-Corporation and submitted that arbitrariness in the decision of the respondent-Corporation can be further gauged from the said Annexure dated 21.11.2022, in terms whereof the services of a Welder have been outsourced from Himachal Pradesh State Electronics Development Corporation. Accordingly, learned Counsel for the petitioner prayed that petition be allowed as prayed for.

4. The petition is opposed by the respondent-Corporation. In the reply filed by the respondent-Corporation, it is stated that though the petitioner alongwith two other candidates was recommended against the post of Welder by the Himachal Pradesh Staff Selection Commission but no offer of appointment was given to them and thus, no indefeasible right stood accrued upon the petitioner.

5. Learned Counsel for the respondent-Corporation, by referring to the contents of the reply, submitted that the Board of Directors of the respondent-Corporation, in its 65th meeting held on 30.06.2018, on the recommendation of the Service Committee dated 02.06.2018, decided to withdraw the posts and manpower in the workmen category particularly Electrician, Fitter and Welder from Operation and Maintenance Stage Projects and to divert them to construction stage projects. As the posts in issue, i.e. post of Welder, were created with the aim to util

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top