Satnam Singh v. The Union Of India & ORS

CWP 20883/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP 20883/2017 (O&M) Date of decision:09.01.2018 Satnam Singh ..............Petitioner v.

Union of India and others ..............Respondents Coram:

Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present:- Mr.AK Walia,Advocate for the petitioner.

Jaswant Singh,J,(Oral).

Petitioner was engaged as a Counselor on purely temporary basis in the Financial Literacy Center, Anandpur Sahib operated by Ropar Cooperative Central Bank vide Memo dated 22.4.2016 (Annexure -4). By filing the present writ petition challenge is laid to the order dated 11.8.2017 (P-8) whereby his services have been terminated with effect from the same date.

Counsel for the petitioner has argued that in the light of terms and conditions enumerated in the NABARD guidelines relating to the service conditions of Financial Literacy Counselor adopted by the Board of Directors, the petitioner was required to be issued two months' notice before terminating his services. It is further submitted that the basis for terminating his services as per the impugned order P-8 is that petitioner does not fulfill the revised educational qualifications of being a Graduate for engagement as Financial Literacy Counselor, as per revised policy dated 7.12.2016 (P-9) which, being subsequent, cannot be made applicable to the Rajinder Parshad Joshi 2018.01.11 11:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP 20883/2017 petitioner who was engaged earlier.

After hearing learned counsel no ground for interference is made out.

It is conceded fact that the petitioner is only a 10+2 pass and at the time of his engagement no advertisement or any selection process was undertaken, although as per guidelines operating then (P-5) an advertisement and selection process was required to be undertaken. It is also conceded fact that even as per previous guidelines (P-5), which have been superseded by fresh guidelines (P-9) adopted by the Board of Directors (the competent authority),mandated that a Counselor must possess a Graduation degree,and the petitioner was engaged in violation of prescribed educational qualification. Still further, as per the then policy (P-5), it is inter alia provided under condition(a) of selection procedure that in case it is detected at any stage that a candidate does not fulfill the eligibility norms then his/her candidature will automatically stand cancelled. Dismissed.

09.01.2018 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Rajinder Parshad Joshi 2018.01.11 11:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document