The Lieutenant Governor And ORS. v. Ruma Mondal And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COUR AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...

WP.CT/179/2021 The Lt. Governor & others ... Petitioners Vs.

Ruma Mondal & another ... Respondents WP.CT/180/2021 The Lt. Governor & others ... Petitioners Vs.

Manik Mondal & another ... Respondents WP.CT/181/2021 The Lt. Governor & others ... Petitioners Vs.

Susankar Sarkar & another ... Respondents WP.CT/182/2021 The Lt. Governor & others ... Petitioners Vs.

Ananya Mukherjee & another ... Respondents WP.CT/183/2021 The Lt. Governor & others ... Petitioners Vs.

Sharmista Paul ... Respondent WP.CT/184/2021 The Lt. Governor & others ... Petitioners Vs.

Priyanka Talukdar & another ... Respondents Mr.Krishna Rao, Advocate ... for the petitioners Mr.G.Binnu Kumar, Advocate .. for the respondents September 17, 2021 [GNC] Item No.2,3,4,5,6 and 7

The aforesaid writ petitions are clubbed together as the Tribunal passed a common order disposing of the Tribunal Applications taken out by the private respondents. Way back in 2015 the appellants notified 43 vacancies in the post of Craft Instructors in different field of excellence inviting applications from the respective aspirants having requisite qualification in such field. It is also not in dispute that for every specified category the total number of vacancies had been earmarked and the candidates applied to such earmarked specialized category having a requisite qualification and proficiency thereat.

The present applications pertain to the selection of the candidates to the post of Craft Instructors (Music, Vocal/Instrumental). The seven candidates were finally elected against the earmarked vacancy but their appointments were not made as spate of litigations came before the Tribunal challenging the recruitment process or the action of the recruitment authorities and the orders were passed by the Tribunal in diverse manners. In some of such tribunal applications, the interim order was passed keeping one post vacant and in others the appointment made by the authority shall abide by the result of the tribunal applications.

It is also not in dispute that one of the tribunal application being OA/351/585/2019 is filed pertaining to the aforesaid

specified category and the Tribunal passed an interim order that any appointment made in pursuance to the said notification shall be subject to the further order that may be passed in the original application and the clear stipulation to that effect shall be made in the orders of appointment if to be issued. There is no absolute fetter on the part of the recruiting authority to proceed with the appointment of the successful candidates in the aforesaid specified category but the appointments so made should be manifestly subject to the result of the said tribunal application. Since the authority was keeping their appointments in limbo, the seven successful aspiring candidates took out the tribunal application before the Tribunal seeking a direction upon the recruiting authorities to issue an order of appointment and posting as a Craft Instructor in Music, Vocal/Instrumental category on the basis of the results so published on 20th April, 2015.

The Tribunal disposed of the application with the following directions:- "8. Accordingly, as undisputedly the applicants have been selected on merit and no order or judgment have been brought to the fore to demonstrate stay of such appointments, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondent authorities to issue appointment orders to the applicants herein as per law. Their appointment letters, however, should contain a clear stipulation that such appointments shall abide by further orders which may be passed in related O.A.s,if any, challenging appointments in posts of Craft Instructors (Music, Vocal/Instrumental). The appointment orders should be issued within eight weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this order. "

Though the order appears to be innocuous and not inconsistent with the interim order passed in the tribunal application filed by one Rita Mary the aforesaid tribunal application indicated hereinbelow, but the Administration has challenged the order solely on the ground that any appointment would amount to the violation of an interim order passed in the different tribunal applications.

It is submitted by Mr.Rao, the learned advocate appearing for the appellants that if the appointment is made and the tribunal application filed by the unsuccessful candidates are ultimately allowed, it would have an impact on the seniority list and therefore the authorities have decided to keep the recruitment in abeyance until the pending tribunal applications filed by the unsuccessful candidates are finally disposed of. Mr.Binnu Kumar, learned advocate appearing for the private respondents contends that the Tribunal have taken care of such position and the appointment was directed to be made with the caveat that such appointment is subject to the outcome of the tribunal applications pending before the Tribunal. According to him, it has sufficiently take care of the apprehensions of the Administration and therefore, the instant writ petitions deserves dismissal.

After hearing the respective counsel, it is no doubt true that the recruitment process ensued sometimes in the year 2015 earmarking the total vacancy in the specialized category inviting

the application from the aspiring candidates in such category. The candidate who applied in different category cannot be considered to be eligible for another category as the proficiency and the requisite qualification is the precondition for considering the candidature in such specialized category. The private respondents have applied for music, vocal/instrumental category for which the seven posts were notified by the appellants. Finally, the private respondents have been found successful as the final list which was published indicated so but such appointment is postponed because of the tribunal application having entertained by the Tribunal filed by Rita Mary.

Our endeavour has failed to find out any fetter put by the tribunal in the application filed by Rita Mary that no appointment can be made but sufficient safeguards have been made therein that if any appointment is made, such appointment shall be subject to the result of the pending tribunal application. Even the impugned order is passed by the Tribunal in tune or compatible with the order passed in Rita Mary that the appointment to the private respondents shall be subject to the result of the said tribunal application filed by Rita Mary. Obviously, the aforesaid observation is made that in the event the tribunal application filed by the said unsuccessful candidate is allowed, the respondents who were otherwise found eligible for appointment shall not claim any equity nor such appointment would confer any inchoate or indefeasible right.

Since the sufficient safeguard has already been shown by the Tribunal while disposing of the application, we do not find that the apprehension of the appellants is sustainable. Since the period for complying the impugned order passed by the Tribunal has expired and the appellants are facing an application for contempt, we thus feel that such time may be extended. Accordingly, the time to comply the impugned order is extended by three weeks from date.

The writ petitions are, thus, disposed of.

(Harish Tandon, J. ) ( Shivakant Prasad, J. )