HIGH COURT OF DELHI
UNION OF INDIA & ANR – Appellant
Versus
URMILA DEVI & ORS – Respondent
RSA-117/2016
RSA 117/2016
Page 1 of 10
$~1 (Appellate)
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+
RSA 117/2016
UNION OF INDIA & ANR
..... Appellants
Through:
Mr. Vikrant N. Goyal, Adv.
versus
URMILA DEVI & ORS
.... Respondents
Through:
Ms. Santwana Agarwal with
Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advs. for Respondents 1
and 3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
%
23.05.2022
1.
This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (CPC) assails the judgement dated 20th October,
2015, passed by the learned Additional District Judge (“the learned
ADJ”) in RCA 8/2015 (U.O.I & Ors v. Urmila Devi & Ors), whereby
the learned ADJ has affirmed the judgment/order dated 22nd
December, 2012 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge (“the
learned SCJ”) in Suit 967/06/99 (Urmila Devi and Ors. v. U.O.I &
Ors.).
2.
The respondents were registered with the Employment
Exchange, Delhi for appointment as “Safai Walas”.
2022:DHC:2032
RSA 117/2016
Page 2 of 10
3.
Consequent to release of 91 vacancies of Safai Walas by the
Army Headquarters vide letter dated 4th May, 1995, an exercise for
recruitment of the said 91 Safai Walas was undertaken by the office of
Respondent 2. Even after the said recruitment exercise was
undertaken, 20 sanctioned posts of Safai Walas remained unfilled. On
16th May, 1996, therefore, Respondent 2 addressed a communication
to the Army Headquarters, which has been reproduced in extenso in
para 11 of the impugned judgment dated 20th October, 2015 of the
learned ADJ, and reads thus:
“Delhi Tele No. 3036082
Station Headquarters
Delhi Cantt-10
54/69/Civs .
16 May 96
UCA no.fl/15
Addl Dte Gen of Org/Org 4 (Civ)(b)
Adjutant General's Branch
Army Headquarters
DHQ PO New Delhi-110001
RECRUITMENT OF CONSY SAFAIWALAS
1.
It is submitted that 20 (Twenty) vacancies of consy
safaiwalas are available with this Headquarters after
carrying out the recruitment action of (71+20) vacancies of
consy safaiwalas released by your HQ vide your letter Nos.
15972/Stn/HQ/Rel/Org 4 (Civ) (b) dated 4 May 95 and
15972/Stn/HQ/Rel/Org 4 (Civ) (b) dated 4 May 95. These
vacancies have occurred due to non availability of
candidates with the Employment Exchange and retirement
etc.
2.
The shortfall of these consy staff adversely affecting
the hygiene and sanitation of the areas. You are therefore,
requested to release the vacancies immediately to make up
the deficiency.
3.
An early action is requested please.
2022:DHC:2032
RSA 117/2016
Page 3 of 10
sd/-
(NB Thapa)
Major
DAA & QMG
for Stn Cdr”
4.
Consequent to the above, the appellants wrote to the
Employment Exchange, requiring them to recommend the names of
persons to be recruited as Safai Walas against the aforesaid 20 posts.
The Employment Exchange sent the names of the respondents, who
were issued Call Letters on 12th February, 1996 by the appellants,
requiring them to appear for interview on 17th February, 1996.
Consequent to the said interview, in which the respondents the
respondents were apparently successful, letters dated 4th April, 1997
were addressed by the appellants to the respondents, offering them the
posts of Safai Walas. Thereafter, the respondents were subjected to
medical examination and were found fit for appointment as Safai
Walas, and necessary Certificates of Health under Section 49 of the
Civil Service Regulations were issued to them.
5. Despite this, the respondents were not appointed as Safai Walas
and, instead, the appellants wrote to the Employment Exchange,
calling for fresh names.
6.
Aggrieved thereby, the respondents filed Suit 967/06/99, from
which the present proceedings emanate. The respondents sought, in
the suit, a decree of permanent injunction, restraining the appellants
from appointing persons other than the respondents as Safai Walas and
for a decree of mandatory injunction, directing the appe