R.V.R Murty v. Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WP.CT/20/2023 Dr.R.V.R.Murty Vs Union of India and others Mr. Rajinder Singh ... for the petitioner Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ...

for the respondent nos.2 to 6 Mr. Arul Prasanth ...

for the respondent no.7 November 17, 2023 [SR] Item No.8 1.

This writ petition is arising out of an order dated 13th February, 2023 in connection with the original application filed by the present writ petitioner under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking, inter alia, a mandatory order directing the respondent authorities more particularly the respondent nos.4,5,& 6 to fix the seniority of the applicant and the private respondent in accordance with the date of joining in service or date of confirmation and further directing them to place the applicant at serial no.33 instead of serial no.34.

2.

Briefly stated, the petitioner was working as Associate Professor (Political Science) at Jawaharlal Nehru Rajkeeya Mayavidyalaya, Port Blair. The Principal of the College issued a notice dated 05.11.2012 by circulating the provisional seniority list of regular faculty members of JNRM prepared by the office of the Secretary (Education), Andaman and Nicobar Administration and thereby inviting objections, if any, from

the Assistant/Associate Professor of the College within the stipulated time.

3.

The present writ petitioner has stated that the private respondent namely Mr. N.Balakrishnan was not appointed initially on ad hoc basis along with the applicant. However, in the year 2005, the private respondent was appointed as Associate Professor on adhoc basis and even in the year 1999 the private respondent N.Balakrishnan was not a regular appointee to the post of Associate Professor, whereas the applicant was appointed initially as adhoc Assistant Professor in the year 1995 and was regularized in the year 1999. 4.

It was the contention of the present petitioner that N.Balakrishnan was appointed as ad hoc lecturer in Political Science in M.G.Govt. College Mayabunder with effect from 05.10.1999 i.e. the commencement of his ad hoc appointment. At the same time, he was ordered to be considered for ad hoc appointment and was regularized against the post of Lecturer in Political Science in MGG College, Mayabunder vide order dated 24.03.2005 by the Administration.

5.

In fact, the private respondent was not borne in the cadre when the applicant was appointed as adhoc Assistant Professor and accordingly he could not have been placed above the present writ petitioner.

6.

In 1994, an advertisement was issued by the Administration inviting application for the post of Lecturer/Associate Professor on ad hoc basis for JNRM Port Blair and MGGC, Mayabunder. In response to the said

advertisement, the writ petitioner as well as the private respondent participated and the writ petitioner was selected and appointed to the post of lecturer Political Science on ad hoc basis, however, the private respondent namely N.Balakrishnan was selected but not appointed. 7.

Being aggrieved, M. Balakrishnan filed an application being OA/110/AN/1995 in which he had raised the issue that the selection committee prepared the panel in which his name was placed at Serial No.1 but at the time of issuing appointment letters, his name was ignored whereas the persons whose names appeared much below to him in the said panel were appointed. The said application was allowed on contest and direction was given upon the respondents to give him appointment in the said post on the basis of the selection made on 16.05.1995 with retrospective date on which others were appointed and he is entitled to get all benefits of the service with retrospective effect and he should be placed over the respondent no.6 to 9 and it should be done within three months.

8.

The respondent no.6 was the present writ petitioner. The said order was not challenged by the writ petitioner. 9.

In the meantime, it appears that the present writ petitioner along with the other lecturers/Associate Professors had approached the Tribunal for regularization of ad hoc service in which several orders were passed between 04.09.1998 and 27.11.1998 by which the respondent authorities were directed to regularize the services with the

approval of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) vide Administration's order No.3048 dated 28.08.1999. 10.

In view of the fact that the ad hoc appointees were extended benefits of regularisation, N.Balakrishnan again filed an application, being OANo.47/AN/2004, before the Tribunal for regularisation of his service in which an order was passed on 09.06.2004 with the direction to the respondent to recommend the case of the applicant i.e. N.Balakrishnan to the UPSC for his regularisation against available vacancy and if he is found suitable, his regularisation should be given effect from the date when his juniors as per earlier order of the Tribunal were regularized, with all consequential benefits. 11.

In fact the said order is reiteration and affirmation of the earlier order by which the status of the M.Balakrishnan was determined and direction was given for his appointment to said the post over and above the respondent nos.6 to 9. 12.

The Administration, on the basis of the said order, had implemented the said order by virtue whereof the private respondent was placed above the present writ petitioner. The entire fact has been encapsulated in the paragraph 9 of the impugned order.

13.

Because of the recommendation of the Union Public Service Commission and having regard to the fact that the M.Balakrishnan was denied his rightful place by the Administration for the reasons best known to them, it cannot be contended that he could not be placed above the present

writ petitioner as the initial order of the Tribunal in his favour was not implemented within a period of three months. 14.

It appears that in compliance with the order dated 09.06.2004 passed by the Tribunal and with the approval of the UPSC in its letter dated 03.03.2005, the Lieutenant Governor has issued an order No.237 dated 24.03.2005 regularising the ad hoc appointment of M.Balakrishnan against the post of Lecturer (Political Science) with MGGC College, Mayabunder with effect from 10.05.1999. The seniority of Shri M.Balakrishnan has to be fixed on the basis of the said recommendation.

15.

There is another aspect of this matter. Admittedly, Shri M.Balakrishnan, who was the first empanelled candidate and he has a right to be considered for seniority based on such merit list published by the Administration.

16.

On such consideration, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Tribunal. 17.

The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 18.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of usual formalities.

( Soumen Sen, J. ) ( Siddhartha Roy Chowdhury, J. )