Mere selection in recruitment does not confer indefeasible right to appointment if process tainted by procedural irregularities confirmed by inquiry; authority may bona fide withhold without hearing candidates.

ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

1.Present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:

“A. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order notification dated 22-04-2016 only in respect of the post pertain to the applicants.

B. Issue a suitable order, writ or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to direct the respondents to permit the applicants to discharge his duties and pay salary and other benefits with all consequential benefits and further be pleased to direct the respondents to issue appointment letters to the selected applicants as per list dated 20-12-1997 and this may be treated in service from that date with all consequential benefits.

C. Issue any other and further writ, order or directions; which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

D. Award the cost of the O.A. to the Applicant.”

2. Brief facts of this case are that the applicants had applied against the vacancies released by the Army Head Quarter vide order dated 30.08.1996 for 68 Majdoor, order dated 20.09.1996 for 20 Fireman and the order dated 10.10.1996 for 2 Messenger in the Central Ordinance Depot, Kanpur. Thereafter, some of the applicants were allowed to join in their respective posts for which they were selected. In the meantime, some complaints were lodged with the allegations that irregularities were committed in the selections to these posts. The C.O.D. Majdoor Sangh had assailed the selection list by filing a CMWP No.2121/1998 which was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court vide an order dated 20.01.1998. On 03.03.1998 an inquiry officer was appointed to inquire into the alleged inquiry and it submitted the report on 16.05.1998 that the allegations were false and mischievous. Thereafter, respondent no.2 gave permission/sanction for issuing appointment letters to the selected candidates. The Army Headquarter vide letter dated 21.05.1998 gave clearance to issue appointment letters. 27 appointment letters were processed and signed by the commandant on 26.05.1998 and they were dispatched by registered post on the same day. Some of the successful candidates appeared on 27.05.1998 and reported for joining duties. However, on 29.05.1998, respondent no.5 directed that the applicants have to await further instructions as advised to them by the higher authorities. Some of the applicants were not allowed to join and some denied work permission whereas others were not even issued/allowed to join as various complaints were received against the selection proceedings and the army headquarter vide telex order dated 27-05- 1998 directed to keep the appointments in abeyance until further orders. The telex message was followed by letter No. AHQQ No.370726/05-14 dated 27-05-1998. Aggrieved by this action of the army headquarters several applications have been filed in this tribunal for quashing the order dated 27-05-1998 and for a direction to the respondents to permit the selected candidates to discharge their duties and to pay their salary and other benefits admissible against their posts w.e.f. 26-05-1998. It has also been prayed that a direction be given to the respondents to issue appointment letters to remaining selected candidates as per list dated 20-12-1997 and they may be treated in service.

3. Earlier the applicants filed Original Application before this Tribunal and on this issue, t