Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Page No.# 101/104

90. From the above analysis of the facts and the relevant provisions of law, it would be seen that the Health Department of the Government of Assam had carried out a detailed fact finding inquiry as regards the genuineness of the appointments of the petitioners. The petitioners have been afforded the opportunities to appear before the Screening Committee on various occasions and the petitioners have been asked to prove their genuineness of their appointments. Not only the petitioners failed before the Screening Committee to prove their genuineness inspite of the deficiencies pointed out, even before this Court, the petitioners could not show that their appointments were made in terms with the provisions of the Rules of 1997 or were made with the approval of the then existing SLEC or that their appointments were made not during the ban period or that there was Finance (SIU) Department's approval prior to their appointments. The only plea which has been taken in the replies to the show cause notices was that the petitioners were duly appointed against the vacant sanctioned posts and were regularly receiving the salaries without any objection and the transfer orders of the petitioners also show that the Director of Health Services knew very well that the petitioners were appointed. It was also the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners by drawing the attention of this Court to the Office Memorandums dated 04.07.2005 and 14.07.2005 that the petitioners being disbursed the salaries by the respondent authorities meant that the petitioners appointments were made either with the due approval of the SLEC or with the approval of the Finance (SIU) Department in as much as without the approval number, the salaries of the petitioners could not have been released. It is the opinion of this Court that the said contentions of the petitioners are totally misconceived in as much as if the appointments of the petitioners were made de hors the Rules of 1997 or during the ban period or without SLEC or SIU approval as the case may be, the illegality in their appointments do not get legalized in view of the complicity of the then Joint Directors of Health Services, the Director of Health Services, Assam and the Treasury Officers who were releasing the salaries who with impunity resorted to illegalities, nepotism and favouritism by violating the provisions of the Rules of 1997, the prevailing Page No.# 102/104 Executive Instructions as well as the rights of other eligible candidates under Article 14 & 16 of the Constitution.

93. Accordingly, this Court, therefore, directs as follows:-

(i) The Government Officials who were responsible in facilitating such illegal appointments and the Government Officials who resorted to pay salaries to the petitioners without taking into account as to whether the petitioners' appointment orders had the SLEC or SIU approval are required Page No.# 103/104 to be made accountable as they have resorted to actions which have resulted in breaking the public trust reposed upon them. A Constitutional duty is cast upon the State, therefore, to take action against such officials who have belied the trust of the Government. This Court, therefore, directs the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam to initiate appropriate actions against such officials as per the extant laws including criminal actions. This direction is issued to the Chief Secretary, Government of Assam taking into account that during the course of hearing, this Court made a specific query upon the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Health Department as regards any criminal proceedings initiated against the then officials to which the learned Standing Counsel, Health Department submitted that certain criminal proceedings have been initiated, but the same are not progressing as required due to the indifference of some Departments. Therefore, this Court deeming it fit and proper has issued the above directions to the Chief Secretary, Government of Assam.