Back
2021 Supreme(P&H) 394
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sanjay Kumar, J.
Sarbjeet Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. - Respondent
C.W.P. (Civil Writ Petition) No. 37643 of 2018 , 30609 of 2019 , 32613 of 2019 , 34146 of 2019 , 24746 of 2019 , 37756 of 2018 , 37007 of 2019 , 2837 of 2019
Decided On : 10-02-2021
Amarjit Singh, Advocate, Sudhir Nar, Advocate, Arvind Seth, Advocate, Chetan Mittal, Advocate, Vivek Singla, Advocate
The petitioners had a vested right to be considered for adjustment against sanctioned posts, protected under Section 5(d) of the Indian Institute of Management Act, 2017.
Headnote:
Contractual Employment - IIM Amritsar - Indian Institute of Management Act, 2017 - [FACT OF THE CASE] The petitioners were appointed on a temporary basis on contract by IIM Amritsar. They sought regularization of their services and adjustment against sanctioned posts as per the policy decision dated 31.03.2015. Their services were terminated, and they approached the court seeking relief. [FINDING OF THE COURT] The court found that the petitioners were appointed after due notification and selection through interviews, but their nature of appointment was purely temporary and on a contract basis, in line with Clause 6(v) of the Minutes dated 31.03.2015. The court held that the petitioners had a right to be considered for regularization in service, protected under Section 5(d) of the Indian Institute of Management Act, 2017. [ISSUES] The issues revolved around the nature of the petitioners' appointment, the validity of the Minutes dated 31.03.2015, and the authority to create and abolish posts. [RATIO DECIDENDI] The court ruled that the petitioners had a vested right to be considered for adjustment against sanctioned posts, and the IIM Amritsar's actions were arbitrary and lacked transparency. The court ordered the petitioners to be continued in service until their right to be adjusted against regular posts was given effect. [FINAL DECISION] The writ petitions were allowed, setting aside the impugned orders dated 05.10.2018, and the services of the petitioners were to be utilized by IIM Amritsar until consideration of their right to be adjusted against regular posts.
JUDGMENT
Sanjay Kumar, J. - Pertaining to the same issues, these eight writ petitions are amenable to final disposal by way of this common order.
2. The Government of India set up 06 new Indian Institutes of Management in the year 2015. One of them was at Amritsar. These Institutes were to start their academic sessions from 2015-16. The existing Indian Institutes of Management at Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Calcutta, Lucknow, Indore and Kozhikode were to mentor the six new Institutes. The Indian Institute of Management (IIM) at Amritsar was to be mentored by IIM, Kozhikode. A meeting was held on 31.03.2015 under the Chairmanship of the Secretary, Higher Education, Government of India, with the Directors of the mentor IIMs of the proposed Institutes and several decisions were taken as to land allotment for the temporary campuses of the new IIMs, shifting of the said IIMs to permanent campuses, costing for infrastructure, the role to be played by the mentoring IIMs, the student strength for the 1st year courses in the new IIMs, etc. Such unanimous decisions were recorded in Clause 6 of the Minutes of that meeting. Clause 6(i) stated that all the new IIMs should start their current academic sessions (2015-16) by admitting students for Post Graduate Diploma Programs by July, 2015 and latest by August, 2015. Clauses 6(ii) and (iii) dealt with aspects relating to expenditure while Clause 6(iv) stated that till such time administrative professionals were appointed by the new IIMs, the mentoring IIMs may engage such professionals on contract basis. Clause 6(v) is of particular relevance and it reads as under:-
'v) The Mentor Institutes may also hire/engage/appoint faculties following the due process on temporary basis. Later after the registration of the Societies of the new IIMs the critical faculty and staff hired/engaged/appointed may be adjusted against sanctioned posts (to be) of the new IIMs.'
3. The Society of the IIM, Amritsar, was registered on 27.08.2015. However, Advertisements were issued even after this event through the aegis of the mentoring IIM, Kozhikode, on different dates for making selection and appointment to various posts. The petitioners in these cases were recruited on temporary basis on contract after such process.
4. Sarbjeet Singh, the petitioner in CWP-37643-2018, was appointed as a Junior Multi-tasking Assistant pursuant to the Advertisement dated 23.08.2016. The offer of appointment made to him, vide letter dated 27.10.2016, as in the cases of the others, was through the IIM, Kozhikode, the mentoring Institute for IIM, Amritsar. He joined on 01.11.2016 and worked continuously for more than 04 years with breaks in service. He was given the benefit of the 6th & 7th Central Pay Commission recommendations with regard to Grade Pay and pay fixation. The material placed on record by him manifests that his services were utilized as a Driver. While so, the IIM, Amritsar, initiated a fresh tender process for recruiting Drivers on monthly contract basis, vide letter dated 24.06.2018. This letter reflects that the IIM, Amritsar, was of the opinion that the activities in the transit campus would increase in future and Drivers' services on monthly contract basis were required to be procured on outsourcing basis from a professional agency. The annual expenditure on account of such outsourcing was estimated at ' 24 lakh. Apprehending that his services would be discontinued, Sarabjeet Singh approached this Court by way of CWP-18722-2018. The said writ petition was disposed of on 31.07.2018, directing the IIM, Amritsar, to take a decision on his representation dated 20.01.2018, whereby he had sought regularization of his services. By order dated 05.10.2018, his request was turned down. The IIM, Amritsar, stated therein that it had never given any assurance to any of the contractual appointees that as and when a vacancy came up,
