State
of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Suresh Kumar Verma & Aar [1996] INSC 128 (24 January 1996)
Ramaswamy,
K.Ramaswamy, K.Ahmad Saghir S. (J) G.B. Pattanaik (J)
CITATION:
1996 AIR 1565 JT 1996 (2) 455 1996 SCALE (2)307
ACT:
HEAD NOTE:
O R D
E R
Delay
condoned.
We
have heard the counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave arises from
the orders passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. In this case in CWP
No.722/93 dated 10.9.1993, the Division Bench of the High Court has disposed of
the matters on the ground that the respondents were re-engaged as Assistant
Development Officers on daily wages pursuant to the direction by it . It is
settled law that having made rules of recruitment to various services under the
State or to a class of posts under the State, the State is bound to follow the
same and to have the selection of the candidates made as per recruitment rules
and appointments shall be made accordingly. From the date of discharging the
duties attached to the post the incumbent becomes a member of the services.
Appointment on daily wage basis is not an appointment to a post according to
the Rules.
It is
seen that the project in which the respondents were engaged had come to an end
and that, therefore, they have necessarily been terminated for want of work.
The Court cannot give any directions to re-engage them in any other work or
appoint them against existing vacancies. Otherwise, the judicial process would
become other mode of recruitment de hors the rules.
Mr. Mahabir
Singh, learned counsel for the respondents contended that there was an
admission in the counter affidavit filed in the High Court that there were
vacancies and that, therefore, the respondents are entitled to be continued in
service. We do not agree with the contention. The vacancies require to be
filled up in accordance with the rules and all the candidates who would
otherwise eligible are entitled to apply for when recruitment is made and seek
consideration of their claims on merit according to the Rules for direct
recruitment along with all the eligible candidates. The appointment on daily
wages cannot be a conduct pipe for regular appointments which would be a
back-door entry, detrimental to the efficiency of service and would breed seeds
of nepotism and corruption. It is equally settled law that even for Class IV employees
recruitment according to rules is a pre-condition. Only work-charged employees
who perform the duties of transitory nature are appointed not to a post but are
required to perform the work of transitory and urgent nature so long as the
work exists. One temporary employee cannot be replaced by another temporary
employee.
Under
these circumstances, the view of the High Court is not correct. lt is
accordingly set aside. It is mentioned that the respondents have become overaged
by now. If they apply for any regular appointment by which time if they become
barred by age the State is directed to consider necessary relaxation of their
age to the extent of their period of service on daily wages and then to
consider their cases according to rules, if they are otherwise eligible.
The appeel
is accordingly allowed. No Costs.
Back
Pages: 1 2
