Back
1993 Supreme(J&K) 50
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
R.P. Sethi, J.
Gh. Hassan Naik - Appellant
Versus
District Development Commissioner & Ors. - Respondent
SWP No. 1234/1992, 840/1992 And 1179/1992
Decided On : 16 July, 1993
Advocate For Appellant: J.S. Kotwal
Advocate For Appellant: P.S. Sodhi
Advocate For Respondent: Kamal Gupta
Advocate For Respondent: D.S. Chouhan
Advocate For Respondent: M. Koul
Adhoc appointments are not seen with favour by the Courts and are required to be discouraged. Under the garb of adhoc appointment, no person has a right to claim permanent absorption or continuance to the post, with the result of hope of continuing to hold the post permanently.
Headnote:
ADHOC APPOINTMENTS - CLASS-IV EMPLOYEES - REGULARISATION - DISCONTINUATION - TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS - RULE 14 OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR CIVIL SERVICES (CLASSIFICATION CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1956 - INTERPRETATION - LEGAL RIGHT - MANDAMUS - ADHOC APPOINTMENTS - DISCOURAGED - ADVERSE EFFECT ON MORALE OF SERVICES - NO RIGHT TO PERMANENT ABSORPTION OR CONTINUANCE - ADHOC APPOINTMENTS - NO DIRECTION FOR REGULARISATION BY COURT - POWER TO PRESCRIBE CONDITIONS OF SERVICE - EXECUTIVE POWER - COURT'S ROLE - RULE OF LAW - ARTICLES 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION.
Fact of the Case:
Petitions challenging the discontinuation of adhoc appointments made by the Chairman or members of Committees constituted for recruitment to Class-IV posts and other posts on an adhoc basis. Petitioners claimed that such appointments could not be discontinued and should be regularised. Petitioners also relied on Rule 14 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956, to argue that temporary appointments made under the rule could not be discontinued until a proper selection was made.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the appointments made by the Chairman or any member of the Committee could not be equated with an order of appointment by the Committee, a corporate body. As the orders were not passed by the competent authority, the petitioners had no right to continue to hold the post beyond the period for which they were appointed and had no right to seek regularisation of their service or issuance of a command to the respondents to allow them to continue to hold the post till the selection was made. The Court also held that adhoc appointments were not seen with favour by the Courts and were required to be discouraged. Under the garb of adhoc appointment, no person had a right to claim permanent absorption or continuance to the post, with the result of hope of continuing to hold the post permanently.
Issues: 1. Whether the appointments made by the Chairman or any member of a Committee constituted vide Govt. Order No, 462 GR of 1990 dated, 16.4.1990, though on adhoc basis, is required to be regularised and cannot be discontinued later on? 2. Whether temporary appointments made under rule 14 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956 once made cannot be dis-continued till a proper selection is made?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The appointments made by the Chairman or any member of the Committee could not be equated with an order of appointment by the Committee, a corporate body. 2. As the orders were not passed by the competent authority, the petitioners had no right to continue to hold the post beyond the period for which they were appointed and had no right to seek regularisation of their service or issuance of a command to the respondents to allow them to continue to hold the post till the selection was made. 3. Adhoc appointments were not seen with favour by the Courts and were required to be discouraged. 4. Under the garb of adhoc appointment, no person had a right to claim permanent absorption or continuance to the post, with the result of hope of continuing to hold the post permanently.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed. The interim stay orders issued were vacated.
1. Whether the appointments made by the Chairman or any member of a Committee constituted vide Govt. Order No, 462 GR of 1990 dated, 16.4.1990, though on adhoc basis, is required to be regularised and cannot be discontinued later on?
2. Whether temporary appointments made under rule 14 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956 once made cannot be dis-continued till a proper selection is made?
Heard the learned, counsel for the parties appearing in the case.
In order to appreciate the rival contention of the parties, some facts pertaining to the appointments of Class-IV employees and other employees and adhoc basis are required to be noticed. In the Circular No. 39-GD of 1988 dated 19-7-1988, it was directed that as the Chief Secretary had observed that various departments had committed irregularities in making appointments of in-eligible candidates, the departments should thereafter process the case for appointment on adhoc basis for obtaining approval of the Hon™ble Chief Minister in Coordination. The Chief Secretary desired not to process such cases in future and put a tola1 stop to all irregular appointments hence forth and once for all. All the Commissioner-cum-Secretaries to the Govt. were requested to furnish the General Department a list of all such cases pending with them for orders of the authorities and maintain strict check in the departments and also to institute action against such officials/officers responsible for committing such irregularities Vide Govt. Order No. 797 Edu. of 1989 dated 26-7-1989 issued by Commissioner-cam-Secretary to Govt. Education Department, sanction was accorded to the constitution of Committee of the officers mentioned therein for making recruitment to the posts falling outside the purview of Jammu and Kashmir State ˜Service Subordinate Board in Education Department and its allied department. For Jammu Division, the Committee comprised of the Director, School Education, Jammu, as Chairman, Joint Director, Principal ˜Higher Secondary School Palanwalla and Under Secretary Education as members. Vide Govt. Order No, 462-GR of 1990 dated 16 4-90, it was provided, "In supersession of all previous order/circulars instructions issued by the Govt. from time to time on the subject, it is hereby ordered that the recruitment to all sanctioned posts falling outside the purview of the State Subordinate Services Recruitment Board including all category Class-IV posts shall hence forth be made by the Appointing Authority on the recommendations of a board constituted in each district consisting of the following :-
1. District Development Commissioner Chairman
2. District Superintending Engineer Member
3 District Education Officer Member
4 District Employment Officer Member Secretary
The jurisdiction of the District Recruitment Boards will extend to all category IV of posts whether they are included in the District, Divisional or State Cadres.
Chairman will be competent to coopt any other officer as a Member for a particular meeting of selection. District Head of the Department to which the recruitment relates will ordinarily be coopted for the selection.
The Board shall restrict selection of candidates for posts in a District to candidates for their districts only.
The Board shall try as far as possible to recruit local candidates in each area for locals vacancies like that in Gurez, Karnah, Bani, Gool, Gool Gulabgarh, Paddar etc.™™
The said Government order was partially modified vide Govt. order No. 5Q3-G4D of 19^1, and it was directed that District Level Committee constituted under the District Development Commissioner for making selection for appointment to the posts falling outside the purview of State Subordinate Services Recruitment Board including all Class-IV posts, shall make selection for such posts only which are in the District Cadre. It was further directed that for the Divisional and State cad
