Service Matter – Back Door Posting – Temporarily appointed to the post of constable – show cause notice issued and service was also terminated – single judge dismissed the writ – DB allowed the writ – Apex court held that in the absence of any advertisement or selection process, the appointment of the respondent is not protected and could be validly terminated. Learned single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition while the Division Bench erred in interfering with the same. =CIVIL APPEAL NO._7392___2014 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.28971 of 2013) State of Bihar and Ors. … Appellant (s) Versus Chandreshwar Pathak … Respondent (s) = 2014 Aug. Part – http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41813

   Service Matter – Back Door Posting – Temporarily appointed to the post of constable – show cause notice issued and service was also terminated – single judge dismissed the writ – DB allowed the writ – Apex court held that in  the  absence  of   any advertisement or selection process, the appointment  of  the  respondent  is not protected and could be validly terminated.   Learned  single  Judge  was justified in dismissing the writ petition while the Division Bench erred  in interfering with the same. =

The respondent was temporarily appointed to the post of  constable  by

the Inspector General of Police, Criminal Investigation  Department,  Patna,

Bihar, vide his  order  dated  14.01.1988  with  the  stipulation  that  his

service could be terminated without assigning any reason or show cause.   In

the year 2000, the High Court of Patna  considered  the  issue  of  backdoor

appointments made in the police department in another case which  led  to  a

direction by the Department of Home  (Police),  Government  of  Bihar  dated

04.09.2000  to  the  Police   Headquarter,   Bihar   to   review   irregular

appointments and to remove such appointees from service.

4.    Accordingly, a show cause notice dated 10.09.2003 was  issued  to  the

respondent-writ petitioner asking him why  his  appointment  should  not  be

cancelled and since no valid reason was shown  in  his  reply,  order  dated

26.09.2003 was passed terminating the services of the respondent.=

Therefore, it is a settled legal proposition that no  person  can  be

appointed even on a temporary or ad hoc basis without inviting  applications

from all eligible candidates. If any appointment is made by merely  inviting

names from the employment exchange or putting a note  on  the  notice  board

etc. that  will  not  meet  the  requirement  of  Articles 14 and 16 of  the

Constitution. Such a course violates the mandates  of  Articles 14 and 16 of

the Constitution of India as it deprives the  candidates  who  are  eligible

for the post, from being considered.  A  person  employed  in  violation  of

these provisions is not entitled to  any  relief  including  salary.  For  a

valid  and  legal   appointment   mandatory   compliance   with   the   said

constitutional  requirement  is  to  be  fulfilled.  The   equality   clause

enshrined in Article 16 requires that every such appointment be made  by  an

open advertisement as to enable all eligible persons to compete on merit.”

 

Accordingly,  it  has  to  be  held  that  in  the  absence  of   any

advertisement or selection process, the appointment  of  the  respondent  is

not protected and could be validly terminated.   Learned  single  Judge  was

justified in dismissing the writ petition while the Division Bench erred  in

interfering with the same.

17.    Accordingly,  we  allow  this  appeal,  set  aside  the  order  dated

05.01.2012 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in L.P.A. No.  945

of 2010  and restore the  order  dated  09.04.2010  passed  by  the  learned

single Judge of the High Court in C.W.J.C. No.204 of 2004.

2014 Aug. Part – http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41813