Shiv Shankar Singh vs Union Of India & Others

Tapabrata Chakraborty, J

The present public interest litigation has been preferred by one Shri Shiv Shankar Singh, claiming to be a social activist, challenging inter alia the Recruitment Rules dated 19th July, 2016.

Mr. Das, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the Andaman and Nicobar Administration, Health Department by lowering down the essential educational qualification and by deleting the technical qualification had illegally created an avenue towards promotion of the private respondents to the post of Laboratory Assistant.

Drawing the attention of this Court to a notification dated 22nd February, 1988, Mr. Das submits that though it was a mandatory requirement for direct recruits to the post of Laboratory Assistant to possess a certificate in MLT course from a recognised institute, the said requirement was absent in respect of the promotees. As a consequence thereof, the promotees to the post of Laboratory Assistant were not in a position to discharge the duties and responsibilities earmarked for the post which include routine urine examination, routine blood examination, i.e. blood counts and parasite examination. Such deletion of technical qualification led to promotion of incompetent persons causing a threat to the patients at large. In appreciation of the duties and responsibilities required to be discharged by a Laboratory Assistant, the Administration published a notification dated 14th July, 2010 for recruitment to the post of Laboratory Assistant enhancing the required educational qualification to XII (Senior School Certificate Examination) from matriculation or its equivalent as prescribed in the Recruitment Rules of 1988. The avenue towards promotion was also deleted and appointment to the post of Laboratory Assistant was notified to be 100% by direct recruitment. Surprisingly thereafter by a notification dated 19th July, 2016, promotional avenue was again inserted in the Rules specifying inter alia that "promotion from amongst the Lab. Attendants on PB-1 with Grade Pay of Rs. 1800 of Directorate of Health Services having 06 years regular service, on seniority cum qualifying of proficiency/trade test in the Pathology Lab of G.B Pant Hospital, Port Blair." The Laboratory Attendants though under the Recruitment Rules of 28th December, 2012 were required to pass (Xth Std.) and to qualify in a Departmental Screening Test, such essential criteria were not made applicable to the promotees under the Recruitment Rules of 19th July, 2016. By lowering down the qualification, the Administration sought to induct incompetent persons, having no technical qualification, in the posts of Laboratory Assistant. Subsequent thereto, vide notification dated 8th November, 2017, the Administration also modified the pay matrix to the post of Laboratory Assistant. With the sole intent to provide promotional facility to a favoured few, including the private respondents herein, the Administration illegally modified the Recruitment Rules dated 14th July, 2010. Such arbitrary and illegal action on the part of the Administration warrants interference of this Court.

Mr. Tabraiz, learned advocate appearing for the Administration submits that the writ application cannot be treated as a public interest litigation inasmuch as from the pleadings it would be evident that the petitioner is espousing the cause of someone else, who has chosen not to come to the forefront. In support of such contention, he has drawn the attention of this Court to the averments made in paragraph 10 of the writ petition wherein it has inter alia been stated that "the applicant is seriously aggrieved against such promotion orders because all the private respondents have no qualification in respect of MLT which is prescribed qualification to the post of Laboratory Assistant because it is a technical post and the department cannot compromise in respect of such technical degree in respect of such post is concerned."

He further contends that as per the Recruitment Rules of 19th July, 2016, 75% of the posts of Laboratory Assistant are required to be filled up by direct recruitment and 25% by promotion. The educational qualification of promotees are calculated based on experience. Further, the promoted candidates were given departmental training in medical laboratory at GB Pant Hospital and were issued necessary completion certificate of training from the head of the Pathology Department. The candidates promoted vide order dated 21st March, 2018 were imparted house training in the medical laboratory at GB Pant Hospital and were issued completion certificate in this regard. The feeder post for promotion to Laboratory Assistant is the post of Laboratory Attendant and the duties and responsibilities of Laboratory Attendant is to help and or assist Laboratory Assistant in the laboratories and as such it is evident that the Laboratory Attendant gets trained along with the Laboratory Assistant. The said Recruitment Rules reflect the policy decision of the Administration and such decision does not suffer from any vice of arbitrariness or unreasonableness.

Mr. Kamraj, appearing for the private respondents submits that another original application challenging the appointments of the private respondents is already pending before the CAT (Calcutta Bench) for adjudication which has been filed by another employee of the Directorate of Health Services namely Shri. S. Babban, who is serving as a Laboratory Technician. The private respondents have already filed the affidavit in opposition in the said original application before the Calcutta Bench (O.A. No.351/00823/2018-Shri. S.Babban v/s Union of India & others).

He contends that the Administration had taken steps in accordance with the Recruitment Rules and the private respondents were promoted to the post of Laboratory Assistants as per the Office Order No.1024 dated 21.03.2018 and they were also given the departmental training of 3 months in the Medical Laboratory at G.B. Pant Hospital, Port Blair and were issued the necessary completion certificate of the training from the Head of the Pathology Department.

Records reveal that challenging the appointments of the private respondents, an application is pending before the learned tribunal. Under the Recruitment Rules, provisions have been incorporated towards direct recruitment and promotion. In consideration of the duties to be discharged, the eligibility criteria have been specified. It is not a case that the Administration had proceeded in derogation to such Recruitment Rules. The policy decision taken by the Administration does not suffer from any arbitrariness.

A composite reading of the averments in the writ petition does not reveal the same has been preferred for enforcement of any public interest or general interest. Public interest litigation in service matters is generally not maintainable. It is well settled that the Writ Court should not sit in appeal over the policy decision of the State and should not encroach upon the field earmarked for the executive. No mala fide can be attributed to such action of the authorities and it cannot be said that the authorities have acted in a manner which would benefit a private party at the cost of the authorities.

Applying such proposition of law to the facts of this case, we are unable to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by the petitioner and the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.