Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 11, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Kalpesh Govindbhai Solanki vs Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation ... on 16 August, 2016

Author: Abhilasha Kumari

Bench: Abhilasha Kumari

                 C/SCA/3732/2011                                           CAV JUDGMENT




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3732 of 2011



         FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


         HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
         ================================================================
         1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed                         No
               to see the judgment ?

         2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                                  No

         3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of                     No
               the judgment ?

         4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of                     No
               law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
               India or any order made thereunder ?

         ================================================================
                     KALPESH GOVINDBHAI SOLANKI....Petitioner(s)
                                      Versus
                 AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THRO'MUNICIPAL
                        COMMISSIONER & 6....Respondent(s)
         ================================================================
         Appearance:
         MR SJ GAEKWAD, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR RAJESH CHAUHAN FOR MR HS MUNSHAW, ADVOCATE for the
         Respondent(s) No. 1 - 2
         MS VIDHI J BHATT, AMICUS CURIAE
         ================================================================
             CORAM: HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI

                                     Date : 16/08/2016


                                     CAV JUDGMENT

1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the  Page 1 of 25 HC-NIC Page 1 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged  the   orders   dated   10.08.2010   (Annexures   A   to   E),  whereby respondents Nos.3 to 7 have been appointed as  Sanitary   Sub­Inspectors   in   the   respondent   Ahmedabad  Municipal   Corporation.   In   the   alternative,   it   is  prayed that the orders dated 10.08.2010 (Annexures C  to   E),   whereby   respondents   Nos.5   to   7   have   been  appointed   as   Sanitary   Sub­Inspectors   be   quashed   and  set aside.

2. Briefly   stated,   the   facts   of   the   case   are   that  the Medical Superintendent of V.S. General Hospital,  Ahmedabad,   respondent   No.2   herein,   invited  applications for various posts including two posts of  Sanitary Sub­Inspector, in the fixed pay of Rs.2,500/­  per   month   by   publishing   an   advertisement   in   the  newspaper. The last date for submitting applications  was   28.08.2001.   Initially,   appointments   to   the   said  posts were to be made for a period of five years. The  requisite qualification for the post of Sanitary Sub­ Inspector   was   Secondary   School   Certificate   or   an  equivalent examination and a Diploma in the course of  Sanitary Inspector from a recognised institution. As  Page 2 of 25 HC-NIC Page 2 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT per   the   petitioner,   he   possesses   the   requisite  qualification for the said post. The petitioner has a  Degree   of   Bachelor   of   Commerce   from   the   Gujarat  University and a Diploma of the Sanitary Inspector's  Training Course from the All India Institute of Local  Self   Government,   Bombay.   The   petitioner   applied   for  the   post   in   question   along   with   all   documents,  pursuant   to   the   said   advertisement.   The   petitioner  belongs to the Scheduled Caste and has a Certificate  from   the   Competent   Authority   in   this   regard.   The  petitioner   appeared   in   the   written   examination  conducted by the respondent authorities on 21.07.2010,  pursuant to an interview call letter sent to him. On  being   successful   in   the   written   examination,   the  petitioner   was   called   for   an   oral   interview   by   a  letter   dated   31.07.2010.   The   oral   interview   was  conducted on 04.08.2010. According to the petitioner,  he fared well in the written test and the viva­voce  test   but   was   not   selected   for   the   post   of   Sanitary  Sub­Inspector. It is the case of the petitioner that  as   per   the   advertisement   issued   by   the   respondent  authorities only two posts of Sanitary Sub­Inspector  were   advertised.   However,   the   respondent   authorities  Page 3 of 25 HC-NIC Page 3 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT filled   up   five   vacancies   of   Sanitary   Sub­Inspectors  and appointed respondents Nos.3 to 7 on the said posts  with   a   fixed   pay   of   Rs.4,500/­   by   the   impugned  appointment   orders   dated   10.08.2010.   The   petitioner  asserts that the action of the respondent authorities  in filling up more posts than advertised is contrary  to law. Hence, the petitioner has challenged the said  appointments by filing the present petition.

3. Respondents   Nos.3   to   7   have   been   served   with  notice of Rule but have chosen not to appear before  the Court despite such service.

4. In   order   to   obtain   an   independent   view   in   the  matter,   this   Court   requested   Ms.Vidhi   J.   Bhatt,  learned   advocate,  to  act   as  amicus   curiae  to  assist  the Court. She has kindly consented to do so.

5. Mr.S.J.   Gaekwad,   learned   advocate   for   the  petitioner,   has   submitted   that   it   is   a   settled  position of law that more posts than those advertised  cannot be filled up. When only two posts of Sanitary  Sub­Inspector   were   advertised,   only   two   posts   could  Page 4 of 25 HC-NIC Page 4 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT have   been   filled   up.   However,   the   respondent  authorities have filled up five posts - three posts in  excess   of   those   advertised.   The   action   of   the  respondents is illegal and no waiting list could have  been   prepared   after   filling   up   the   two   advertised  posts. All five posts were filled up on the same day  by appointing respondents Nos.3 to 7. It is contended  that as the respondents could not have filled up five  posts when only two were advertised, the appointments  of respondents Nos.3 to 7 deserve to be quashed and  set   aside.   The  petitioner   and  others   like  him,   have  been   deprived   of   participating   in   the   recruitment  process for the three posts, therefore, he is entitled  to challenge the said appointments.

6. In support of the above submissions, reliance has  been   placed   upon   the   judgments   referred   to  hereinabove.

(1) State of Bihar and another Vs. Madan Mohan   Singh  and  others  reported in  1994   Supp  (3)  SCC   308, wherein it is held as below:

"7.   Having   carefully   considered   the  Page 5 of 25 HC-NIC Page 5 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT advertisement   and   the   various   averments   in  the   affidavits   and   the   counter­affidavits,   we are of the view that the crucial question   is whether in fact the advertisement and the  initial   decision   of   the   High   Court   were  meant   to   fill   up   only   32   vacancies   and  whether   accordingly   the   High   Court   called  for   only  129   candidates  from   the  list,  who  appeared  for   the   written   test  in  the   ratio  of 1 : 4 and whether consequently the whole   selection   process   was   confined   to   fill   up  only   those,  32  vacancies?   If   the  answer   is  in the affirmative then the question of the  same   list   subsisting  for   one   more   year  for  filling up the subsequent vacancies did not  arise in spite of the resolution of the High   Court dated 24­11­90. As noted above in the  reply   affidavit,   the   Registrar   of   the   High  Court categorically stated that 32 vacancies  were available and to fill up the same, 129   candidates were called for interview namely  four   times   of   the   number   of   vacancies   and  that   the  rest   of   the  vacancies   arose   later  on.   To   satisfy   ourselves,   we   have   also  called   for   the   relevant   records   from   the  High Court and the same is placed before us   in a sealed cover. A persual of the records   shows that in the Full Court meeting on 5­5­ 90 it was resolved that on the basis of the  result   of   the   preliminary   screening   test,  four   times   of   number   of   candidates   to   be  Page 6 of 25 HC-NIC Page 6 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT selected   for   appointment   be   called   for  interview.   From   the   proceedings   of   another  Full   Court   meeting   held   on   15­9­90   it   is  clear   that   it   was   resolved   that   128  candidates alone in order of merit should be  called for interview. The proceedings of the  Full Court meeting dated 24­11­90 would show  that the Full Court finalised the selection  for filling up 32 vacancies only and sent a   list   of   32   candidates   in   order   of   merit.  However,   a   further   resolution   was   passed  that if any further vacancy in the quota of   the   direct   recruits   was   required   to   be   filled   up   within   a   period   of   one   year   the  same   be   filled   up   by   recommending   the  candidates   in   order   of   merit   from   amongst  the remaining candidates in the merit list.  It   is   therefore   crystal   clear   that   the   advertisement   and   the   whole   selection  process that ensued were meant only to fill  up   32   vacancies.   Learned   counsel   for   the   respondents relying on the decisions of this  Court in Kailash Chandra Sharma v. State of  Haryana. 1989 Suppl (2) SCC 696 : (AIR 1990   SC 454) and OP. Garg v. State of U.P., AIR  1991 SC 1202. contended that when there are  temporary   vacancies,   the   direct   recruits  should have their share of quota in respect  of temporary vacancies also. As noted above,  the   temporary   vacancies   arose   subsequently   but even otherwise in the view we are taking   Page 7 of 25 HC-NIC Page 7 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT namely that the particular advertisement and  the consequent selection process were meant  only to fill up 32 vacancies and not to fill   up   the   other   vacancies,   the   merit   list   prepared on the basis of the written test as   well   as   the   viva   voce   will   hold   good   only  for   the   purpose   of   filling   up   those   32  vacancies   and   no   further   because   the   said  process of selection for those 32 vacancies  got   exhausted   and   came   to   an   end.   If   the  same list has to be kept subsisting for the   purpose   of   filling   up   other   vacancies   also  that   would   naturally   amount   to   deprivation  of rights of other candidates who would have   became   eligible   subsequent   to   the   said  advertisement and selection process."  (2) Reliance   has   also   been   placed   on   the  judgment in the case of State of U.P. and others   Vs.   Rajkumar   Sharma   and   others  reported   in  (2006) 3 SCC 330,  wherein the Supreme Court has  held that:

"13. Filling up of vacancies over and above  the number of vacancies advertised would be  violative of the fundamental rights granted  under   Articles   14   and   16   of   the  Constitution. (See: Union of India and Ors.  v.   Ishwar   Singh   Khatri   and   Ors.,   Gujarat  Page 8 of 25 HC-NIC Page 8 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT State   Dy.   Executive   Engineers,   Association   v. State of Gujarat and Ors.State of Bihar   and   Ors.   v.   the   Secretariat   Assistant   S.E.  Union, 1986 and Ors., Prem Singh and Ors. v.   Haryana   State   Electricity   Board   and   Ors.Surendra  Singh  and   Ors.  v.  State  of  Punjab  and Anr. and Kamlesh Kumar Sharma v. Yogesh  Kumar Gupta and Ors."

(3) Another judgment relied upon in the case of  Gujarat   State   Dy.   Executive   Engineers'   Association   Vs.   State   of   Gujarat   and   others   reported in  1994 Supp (2) SCC 591, the relevant  extract of which is as under:

"9. A   waiting   list   prepared   in   an  examination conducted by the Commission does  not   furnish  a   source  of  recruitment.   It   is  operative   only   for   the   contingency   that   if  any of the selected candidates does not join  then the person from the waiting list may be   pushed up and be appointed in the vanacy so   caused or if there is some extreme exigency  the   Government   may   as   a   matter   of   policy  decision  pick   up   persons   in   order   of   merit  from the waiting list. But the view taken by   the High Court that since the vacancies have   not been worked out properly, therefore, the  candidates from the waiting list were liable  Page 9 of 25 HC-NIC Page 9 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT to be appointed does not appear to be sound.   This practice, may result in depriving those  candidates who become eligible for competing  for   the   vacancies   available   in   future.   If  the   waiting  list   in   one  examination  was   to  operate   as   an   infinite   stock   for  appointments,   there   is   a   danger   that   the  State Government may resort to the device of   not   holding   an   examination   for   years  together   and   pick   up   candidates   from   the   waiting   list   as   and   when   required.   The  constitutional discipline requires that this  Court   should   not   permit   such   improper  exercise   of   power   which   may   result   in  creating   a   vested   interest   and   perpetrate  waiting   list   for   the   candidates   of   one  examination   at   the   cost   of   entire   set   of  fresh   candidates   either   from   the   open   or  even from service." 

7. Mr.Rajesh   Chauhan,   learned   advocate   for   Mr.H.S.  Munshaw, learned advocate for respondents Nos.2 and 3,  has submitted that though it is factually correct that  in the advertisement, only two posts of Sanitary Sub­ Inspector   are   mentioned,   however,   a   select   list   was  prepared   by   the   respondents   consisting   of   twelve  candidates. The two meritorious candidates were given  appointment and the remaining ten candidates were kept  Page 10 of 25 HC-NIC Page 10 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT on the waiting list which has a life of one and a half  years.   It   is   further   submitted   that   due   to   the  expansion   of   the   Hospital   and   as   there   was   a  requirement   in   certain   Speciality   Departments,   three  additional   posts   of   Sanitary   Sub­Inspector   were  created   by   respondent   No.1   Corporation,   vide   a  Resolution   dated   04.02.2010,   subsequent   to   the  advertisement.   These   three   additional   posts   were  filled   up   from   the   waiting   list.   There   was   an  administrative   requirement   and   as   maintenance   of  sanitation   is   a   basic   requirement   in   the   Hospital,  respondents   Nos.3   to   7   were   appointed   on   the   three  newly­created   posts.   It   is   contended   that   the  petitioner   was   neither   on   the   Select   List,   nor   the  Waiting   List   and   the   persons   appointed   are   more  meritorious and better qualified and experienced than  him.   Hence,   the   petitioner   has   no   vested   right   to  challenge the appointment of respondents Nos.3 to 7,  who   were   appointed   in   the   interest   of   the  administration and public at large.

8. Ms.Vidhi   J.   Bhatt,   learned  Amicus   Curiae,   has  submitted that as per the law laid down by the Supreme  Page 11 of 25 HC-NIC Page 11 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT Court   in  Prem   Singh   &   Ors.   Vs.   Haryana   State   Electricity   Board   &   Ors.   reported   in  (1996)   4   SCC   319, the selection process by way of advertisement can  be   initiated   for   clear   vacancies.   More   appointments  than   the  number   of   posts   advertised  cannot   be   made,  except   in   exceptional   circumstances.   She   has   relied  upon the following principles of law laid down by the  Supreme Court in the said judgment.

"25. From the above discussion of the case law it   becomes clear that the selection process by way  of   requisition   and  advertisement   can  be  started   for   clear   vacancies   and   also   for   anticipated  vacancies   but   not   for   future   vacancies.   If   the  requisition   and  advertisement   are  for   a  certain   number of posts only the State cannot make more   appointments than the number of posts advertised,   even though it might have prepared a select list   of   more   candidates.  The   State   can   deviate   from   the advertisement and make appointments on posts   falling   vacant   thereafter   in   exceptional   circumstances   only   or   in   a   emergent   situation   and that too by taking a policy decision in that   behalf. Even when filling up of more posts than   advertised   is  challenged   the   court   may   not,   while exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction,   invalidate the excess appointments and may mould   Page 12 of 25 HC-NIC Page 12 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT the relief in such a manner as to strike a just   balance   between   the   interest   of   the   State   and   the   interest   of   persons   seeking   public   employment.   What   relief   should   be   granted   in   such   cases   would   depend   upon   the   facts   and   circumstances of each case." 

(emphasis supplied) 8.1 It   is   further   submitted   that   a   Waiting   List  prepared in an examination conducted by the Commission  does   not   furnish   a   source   of   recruitment.   It   is  operative only for the contingency that if any of the  selected   candidates   does   not   join,   then   the   person  from   the   waiting   list   may   be   pushed   up   and   be  appointed in the vacancy so caused or if there is some  extreme   exigency   the  Government   may,   as   a  matter   of  policy   decision,   pick   up   persons   in   order   of   merit  from the Waiting List.

8.2 According to learned Amicus Curiae, the rational  or  logic  behind   the   aforesaid  proposition  of  law   is  that the filling up of vacancies in excess of those  advertised   would   deprive   candidates   who   were   not  eligible for appointment to the posts on the last date  Page 13 of 25 HC-NIC Page 13 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT for   submission   of   applications   mentioned   in   the  advertisement and who became eligible for appointment  thereafter, of an opportunity of being considered for  appointment on the excess posts, because if the said  additional   posts   are   advertised   subsequently,   those  who   become   eligible   for   being   considered,   would   be  entitled to apply for the same.

8.3 It   is   submitted   that   Article   226   of   the  Constitution contemplates the issuance of directions,  order   or   writs   for   the   enforcement   of   the   rights  conferred   by   Part   III   of   the   Constitution,   or   any  legal   right.   The   existence   of   a   right,   legal   or  fundamental   and   the   infringement   thereof,   are   the  foundation of the exercise of the jurisdiction of the  Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Article  226   jurisdiction   cannot   be   invoked   for   establishing  one's legal or constitutional right.

8.4 In the case on hand, the present petitioner has  neither a legal right nor a fundamental right. Article  14   guarantees   equality   before   the   law   or   the   equal  protection of the laws. Article 16 guarantees equality  Page 14 of 25 HC-NIC Page 14 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT of   opportunity   in   matters   relating   to   employment   or  appointment to any office under the State. In response  to   the   advertisement,   the   petitioner   made   his  application and underwent the process of recruitment  conducted by respondent No.2. He only has a right to  be   considered   for   being   appointed   to   the   post   he  applied   for.   His   candidature   was   considered   and   his  name was not empanelled either in the Select List or  in the Waiting List. In short, he was considered but  was not successful. Further, the petitioner does not  have any legal right to be appointed. It is not his  case that his application had not been considered. He  has   not   raised  any   plea  of  unfair   or   discriminatory  treatment in the selection process. No  mala fide  has  been alleged. All that he seeks in the petition is the  quashing   of   appointment   orders   of   the   private  respondents,   on   the   ground   that   they   were   appointed  against   the   posts   in   excess   of   the   number   of   posts  advertised. In what way the petitioner is aggrieved by  the action of respondent No.2 has not been brought out  in the petition. Learned Amicus Curiae further submits  that viewed in the legal as well as factual context,  the petitioner has no grievance and his interest has  Page 15 of 25 HC-NIC Page 15 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT not been affected. Therefore, it is submitted that the  relief   sought   by   the   petitioner   in   the   present  petition   does   not   deserve   to   be   granted,   more  particularly when the petitioner has no existing legal  right, and neither have any of his fundamental rights  been abridged.

8.5 It   is   further   submitted   that,   as   held   by   the  Supreme   Court,   it   is   only   in   rare,   and   exceptional  circumstances   and   in   emergent   situations   that  appointments   over   and   above   those   advertised   may   be  made. The exercise of such power has to be tested by  the   Court   on   the   touchstone   of   reasonableness.   In  other words, the authorities should clearly spell out  as to under what policy such a decision has been taken  and   what   were   the   exceptional   circumstances   and   the  emergent   situation.   In   its   affidavit­in­reply,  respondent   No.2   explained   the   exceptional  circumstances   which   prompted   it   to   proceed   with   the  appointment of three more candidates from the Waiting  List prepared by the Selection Committee although the  advertisement   was   for   two   posts   of   Sanitary   Sub­ Inspectors.   Considering   the   larger   interest   of   the  Page 16 of 25 HC-NIC Page 16 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT State   as   against   the   individual   interest   of   the  petitioner,   the   impugned   action   on   the   part   of  respondent   No.2   in   filling   up   of   more   posts   than  advertised does come within the exception of emergent  situation carved out by the Supreme Court.

9. This   Court   has   heard   learned   counsel   for   the  respective parties, perused the averments made in the  petition,   contents   of   the   impugned   order   and   other  documents on record.

10. In the background of the above legal and factual  position,   it   emerges   that   undisputably,   respondent  No.2   advertised   only   two   posts   of   Sanitary   Sub­ Inspector.   The   petitioner,   amongst   other   candidates,  applied for the post but was not selected. Though only  two posts were advertised, the respondent authorities  filled   up   five   posts.   After   the   initiation   of   the  selection   process   but   before   its   conclusion,   the  respondent   authorities   had   created   three   additional  posts of Sanitary Sub­Inspector which were filled up  from   the   Waiting   List   of   the   candidates   who   had  applied pursuant to the advertisement for two posts.  Page 17 of 25 HC-NIC Page 17 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT According   to   the   petitioner,   the   action   of   the  respondent   authorities   renders   the   entire   selection  bad, as more posts were filled up than advertised.

11. It   is   a   settled   position   of   law   that   normally,  vacancies over and above the number of vacancies ought  not to be filled up as such an action would deprive  prospective and aspiring candidates to the post from  participating   in   the   recruitment   process   that   would  have   taken   place   had   the   additional   vacancies   been  advertised in future. It could also be possible that a  candidate   who   was   not   eligible   when   the   advertised  vacancies were filled up could acquire the necessary  qualifications   by   the   time   the   additional   vacancies  would have been advertised. Such a candidate would be  deprived of participation in the recruitment process. 

12. The   judgment   relied   upon   by   Mr.S.J.   Gaekwad,  learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard that  have   been   quoted   hereinabove,   makes   this   position  clear.   To   that   extent,   the   submissions   advanced   by  learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be faulted.  However, the Supreme Court has carved out an exception  Page 18 of 25 HC-NIC Page 18 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT to this general principle of law on the ground that  deviation from the advertisement by filling up posts  falling vacant thereafter, can be made in exceptional  and emergent circumstances by taking a policy decision  in that behalf. This has been clearly stated by the  Apex   Court   in   the   case   of  Prem   Singh   &   Ors.   Vs.   Haryana   State   Electricity   Board   &   Ors   (supra),   the  relevant extract of which judgment has been reproduced  earlier.  The   Court   would   be   called   upon   to   examine,  from the material on record, whether there existed any  such emergent or exceptional circumstances justifying  the filling up of more vacancies than advertised. 

13. It is stated in the said affidavit­in­reply that  the Hospital was undergoing an expansion and there was  an urgent requirement of more Sanitary Sub­Inspectors  in   Speciality   Departments   such   as   Cardio­Vascular,  Trauma Centre, ICCU, Cathlab,  M.R.I etc., therefore,  it   was   thought   fit   by   the   Board   of   Trustees   of   the  Hospital   to   open   three   more   posts   of   Sanitary   Sub­ Inspector. A resolution dated 23.01.2010 was passed in  this regard. The Standing Committee of respondent No.1  Corporation which provided the grant to the Hospital  Page 19 of 25 HC-NIC Page 19 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT also   passed   a   resolution   on   04.02.2010,   for   the  creation of three new posts of Sanitary Sub­Inspector.  It   was   decided   that   in   the   interest   of   the  administration   and   the   public   interest,   the   three  newly­created   posts   be   filled   up   from   the   Waiting  List. 

14. It   emerges   from   the   affidavit­in­reply   filed   by  respondent   No.2   and   the   copies   of   the   resolutions  annexed   therewith,   that   the   Hospital   was   under 

expansion and to maintain hygiene, which is the basic  requirement in any hospital, there was an urgent need  for   the   creation   and  filling   up   of   three   additional  posts   of   Sanitary   Sub­Inspector.   Considering   the  circumstances   described,   it   does   appear   that   there  were exceptional and emergent circumstances which led  to   the   creation   and   filling   up   of   three   new   posts. 
Public interest would always prevail over individual  interest in such a situation. 

15. In   the   judgment   in   the   case   of    Prem   Singh   &  Ors.   Vs.   Haryana   State   Electricity   Board   &   Ors   (supra),   the   Supreme   Court   has   clearly   stated   that  even when the filling up of more posts than advertised  Page 20 of 25 HC-NIC Page 20 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT is challenged, the Court may not, while exercising its  extraordinary   jurisdiction,   invalidate   the   excess  appointments and may mould the relief to strike a just  balance.   The   relief   would   depend   on   the   facts   and  circumstances of each case. 

16. In the present case, as stated above, there was  an  emergent  situation   in   the   Hospital   and  an  urgent  requirement of more Sanitary Sub­Inspectors which has  led to the filling up of three posts in excess of the  two   advertised.   Keeping   in   mind   the   requirements   of  the   Hospital   and   the  public   interest,   the  action   of  respondent No.2 would fall under the exception carved  out by the Supreme Court in the case of Prem Singh &  Ors.   Vs.   Haryana   State   Electricity   Board   &   Ors   (supra). 

17. It   is   also   required   to   be   examined   whether,   by  filling   up   posts   in   excess  of  those  advertised,  the  respondent   authorities   have   violated   the   fundamental  rights of the petitioner under Articles 14 and 16 of  the   Constitution   of   India.   No   doubt,   the   petitioner  has   the   right   to   participate   in   the   process   of  recruitment and to aspire for employment. He may also  Page 21 of 25 HC-NIC Page 21 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT nurse a legitimate expectation to be selected for, and  appointed to, the post in question. Such selection and  appointment   would   depend   on   the   merit   of   the  petitioner qua the other participating candidates. The  mere   participation   in   the   recruitment   process   would  confer   no   legal   right   to   be   selected   and   appointed  upon   the   petitioner.   It   is   settled   law   that   even   a  candidate whose name figures on the Select List has no  vested or legal right to appointment. The petitioner  has participated in the selection process but has not  been   found   meritorious.   The   three   additional   posts  were   filled   up   from   amongst   the   candidates   who  appeared   pursuant   to   the   advertisement,   during   the  same process of selection. The appointments on the two  advertised   posts   and   the   three   additional   ones   were  made   on   the   same   day.   It   is   not   as   though   the  petitioner   would   have   acquired   better   qualifications  in   the   interregnum   due   to   the   short   time­span.   The  fact   that   more  posts  were   filled  up  than   advertised  would   not,   in   the   view   of   this   Court,   render   the  entire selection process liable to be quashed and set  aside.   The   petitioner   has   no   legal,   vested   or  fundamental   right   to   be   appointed,   therefore,   the  Page 22 of 25 HC-NIC Page 22 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT appointments of respondents Nos.3 to 7, who were more  meritorious   than   him,   cannot   be   invalidated   only   on  the ground that three additional posts were filled up. 

18. At   this   juncture,   the   prayers   made   by   the  petitioner may be seen. The first prayer is to quash  and   set   aside   the   appointments   of   all   the   five  selected   candidates,   who   are   respondents   Nos.3   to   7  herein. Two of those candidates (respondents Nos.3 and 

4)   have   been   selected   against   the   advertised  vacancies,   in   order   of   merit.   The   petitioner,   being  less meritorious, can have no right to challenge the  appointment of these two candidates. The alternative  prayer   made   by   the   petitioner   is   to   set   aside   the  appointments   of   respondents   Nos.5   to   7.   No  consequential   prayer   has   been   made   to   consider   the  petitioner   for   appointment.   The   petitioner   has   not  made   any   claim   to   the   post   in   question.   As   stated  above,   the   petitioner   has   no   legal,   vested   or  fundamental right to appointment. Even on the ground  that posts in excess of those advertised were filled  up, though in exceptional circumstances, no right of  the petitioner has been violated. The petitioner has  not   made   any   allegations   regarding  mala   fides  or  Page 23 of 25 HC-NIC Page 23 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT discriminatory   practices.   Most   significantly,   he   has  not   even   claimed   that   his   name   be   considered   for  appointment. The prayers made by the petitioner seek  no affirmative action concerning himself but seek to  negative   the   appointments   of   respondents   Nos.3   to   7  or,   in   the   alternative,   of   respondents   Nos.5   to   7.  Taking   into   consideration   the   aspect   that   the  additional   three   posts   were   created   post.   the  advertisement for two posts, due to a dire requirement  in the Hospital and were filled up from the same pool  of   candidates   who   participated   in   the   selection  process in which the petitioner was unsuccessful, and  keeping   in   view   the   larger   public   interest   and   the  principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in  the   case   of  Prem   Singh   &   Ors.   Vs.  Haryana   State   Electricity Board & Ors (supra),  the prayers made in  the   petition   cannot   be   accepted.   Sufficient   reasons  have   been   given   by   respondent   No.2   to   show   the  emergent circumstances that led to the action of the  respondent   authorities,   to   bring   it   within   the  exception carved out by the Supreme Court in the above  judgment. Under the circumstances, to strike down the  appointments   of   respondents   Nos.3   to   7  would  not   be  Page 24 of 25 HC-NIC Page 24 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT justified. 

19. This Court takes the opportunity to express its  gratitude to Ms.Vidhi J. Bhatt, learned Amicus Curiae,  for   the   hard   work   put   in   by   her   and   the   able  assistance rendered by her. 

20. As   a   result   of   the   above   discussion   and   for  reasons   stated   hereinabove,   the   Court   is   unable   to  grant any of the prayers made by the petitioner.

21. The   petition   fails   and   is   rejected.   Rule   is  discharged. There shall be no orders as to costs.   

(SMT. ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.) piyush Page 25 of 25 HC-NIC Page 25 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016