1996 JTR(SC) 191
1996 AIR(SC) 1565 ; 1996 AIR(SCW) 1796 ; 1996 33 ATC 336 ; 1996 72 FLR 804 ; 1996 2 JT 455 ; 1996 LIC 1265 ; 1996 1 LLN 299 ; 1996 2 Scale 307 ; 1996 7 SCC 562 ; 1996 SCC(L&S) 645 ; 1996 1 SCR 972 ; 1996 2 SCT 359 ; 1996 2 SLR 321 ; 1996 KHC 1049 ; 1996 2 Supreme 592
1996(2) SUPREME 592
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy, S. Saghir Ahmed and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.
State of Himachal Pradesh -Appellant
versus
Suresh Kumar Verma & Anr.-Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3492 of 1996
(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 7280 of 1994)
Decided on 24-1-1996
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Sanjay Kumar Pathak and Naresh K. Sharma, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Mahabir Singh, Adv.
IMPORTANT POINT
Selection of candidates to various services under the state must be made as per recruitment rules. Appointment on daily wage basis is not an appointment to a post according to the Rules.
Act Referred :CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.136, Art.309
A) Relevant laws and sections are not explicitly cited in the judgment.
B) Appointment on daily wage basis is not an appointment to a post according to the Rules; recruitment according to rules is a pre-condition even for Class IV employees; only work-charged employees performing transitory duties can be appointed temporarily; regular appointments must follow direct recruitment rules.
Facts of the case:
The respondents were engaged in a project on daily wages and were terminated after the project ended. The High Court had directed their re-engagement as Assistant Development Officers on daily wages.
Findings of Court:
The High Court's direction was set aside as it would circumvent recruitment rules and amount to back-door entry, breeding nepotism and inefficiency. The respondents must apply afresh during regular recruitment.
Issues:
Whether daily wage employees who served during a project can be re-engaged as regular staff through administrative direction bypassing recruitment rules.
Ratio Decidendi:
Appointment on daily wages cannot be a conduit for regular service appointments; adherence to formal recruitment rules is mandatory for all classes, and temporary work does not create a right to regular employment.
Result:
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; no costs awarded.
A) Relevant laws and sections are not explicitly cited in the judgment.
B) Appointment on daily wage basis is not an appointment to a post according to the Rules; recruitment according to rules is a pre-condition even for Class IV employees; only work-charged employees performing transitory duties can be appointed temporarily; regular appointments must follow direct recruitment rules.
Facts of the case:
The respondents were engaged in a project on daily wages and were terminated after the project ended. The High Court had directed their re-engagement as Assistant Development Officers on daily wages.
Findings of Court:
The High Court's direction was set aside as it would circumvent recruitment rules and amount to back-door entry, breeding nepotism and inefficiency. The respondents must apply afresh during regular recruitment.
Issues:
Whether daily wage employees who served during a project can be re-engaged as regular staff through administrative direction bypassing recruitment rules.
Ratio Decidendi:
Appointment on daily wages cannot be a conduit for regular service appointments; adherence to formal recruitment rules is mandatory for all classes, and temporary work does not create a right to regular employment.
Result:
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; no costs awarded.
ORDER
Delay condoned.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Mr. Mahabir Singh, learned counsel for the respondents 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 conduit 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.
5. Under these circumstances, the view of the High Court is not correct. It 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.
6. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
Appeal allowed.
*******