Suram Chand vs State of Jammu and Kashmir

R.C. Gandhi, J.—These Letters Patent Appeals, directed against the judgment dated 21.05.1999 passed in a batch of writ petitions

involving common questions of facts and law, are being disposed of by this common order.

Respondent No. 3 invited applications under Advertisement Notice No. 1/97 dated 27.05.1998 for selection of candidates to fill up Class IV

posts in Agriculture Department in Udhampur district. Pursuant to that notification, 3537 applications were received. A selection committee was

constituted by the Director (R3) for selection of candidates and interviews were held by the said committee on 6th, 7th & 8th June, 1998.

Accordingly appointment orders of 32 candidates the appellants were issued on 30.6.1998 by respondent No. 3, on the date of his demitting the

office on account of retirement. Complaints were received by the Government with regard to the unfair selection. The successor Director of

Agriculture kept the orders of appointment in abeyance by an order dated 4.7.1998. The Government on consideration of the complaint against

the selection, rescinded the appointments by order dated 8.7.1998 which reads as under :

Subject : Appointment of candidates on ClassIV posts.

..................................

Government Order No. 308Agri of 1998 Dated 8.7.1998

Whereas it has come to the knowledge of the Government that Shri Jarnail Singh the then Director, Agriculture, Jammu, has appointed 32 persons

as Class IV employees in the Department of Agriculture Jammu on 30.6.1998, the day when he retired on superannuation.

Whereas complainants have been received by the Government that these appointments have been made by said Shri Jarnail Singh for

considerations and that no proper procedure was followed in making such appointments.

Whereas the details of such appointments have been obtained from the Directorate of Agriculture Jammu and it is revealed that all 32 appointments

have been made on 30.6.1998 when Shri Jarnail Singh had to demit office on superannuation.

Whereas Shri Jarnail Singh functioned as Director, Agriculture Jammu, for over one year and the authority to make appointments of Class IV

employees was vested in him as per Govt. Order No. 1786GAD of 1997 dated 11.11.1997 and the said Jarnail Singh has exercised his authority

only on the date of his superannuation.

Whereas the facts indicate a prima facie case of misuse of authority with ulterior motives and exhibit lack of propriety on the part of a senior Govt.

Officer.

Therefore, pending enquiry in the matter all these appointment orders as indicated in Annexure to his order are hereby rescinded.

By order of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir.

The appellants challenged their ouster and the Govt. Order dated 8.7.1998 (supra) through the medium of S.W.P. No. 1372/98 and the learned

Single Judge after hearing learned counsel for the parties, dismissed the petition. The appellants have assailed the order of the writ court on the

ground that they were selected by the selection committee duly appointed for the purpose. They were allowed to join pursuant to the appointment

orders and without affording them an opportunity of being heard, have been ousted from service. The appointment of the appellants cannot be

taken away except by following the procedure prescribed by law. The principles of natural justice have not been complied with by affording them

an opportunity of being heard.

We have heard learned Counsel for the appellants perused the memorandum of appeal, order under appeal and other record.

It is not disputed that 3537 candidates applied seeking selection and were interviewed on 6th, 7th & 8th June, 1998 which tentatively means

that about 1200 candidates were interviewed in a day by the selection committee. In case one minute is taken to interview a candidate, it would at

lest take 20 hours a day to interview 1200 candidates. It has not been asserted by the respondents that the committee was sitting for 20 hours on

each day. Assuming that 1200 candidates were interviewed in 20 hours a day, the interview apparently appears to be farce and eye wash exercise.

Interview of a candidate in a minute is not possible to assess his suitability by subjecting him to interview process. The argument of Mr. Bhardwarj

with regard to the compliance of the principles of natural justice, is not sustainable in view of the circumstances of the case in which the selection

and appointments have been made. Even if an opportunity of being heard would have been provided to the appellants, that would not have

improved their case because of such an eye wash selection. The principles of natural justice are not to be complied with merely as a formality but

are required to be observed where right of a person is prejudiced. Once the process of selection is held illegal, no right on such selection can be

built upon by the beneficiary of the selection.

Another factor which cannot be lost sight of is that the appointment orders have been issued by the Director on the day of his demitting the

office on retirement. This circumstance cannot be free from other considerations as observed by the learned Single Judge during the course of his

order. The Government has rightly taken notice of the complaints and have prima facie arrived at a conclusion about the abuse and misuse of the

public power with ulterior motive which apparently exhibits lack of propriety on the part of the head of the department.

We are unable to find any sustainable ground to interfere with the order under appeal. We uphold the order of the learned Single Judge.

Consequently, both these appeals fail which are accordingly dismissed.

Appeals dismissed.