Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: selection process completed in Shelly Vadhera And Others vs National Institute Of Technology ... on 22 September, 2023Matching Fragments
3. The Government of India, Department of Personnel and 1 of 18 Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:125439 CWP-19409-2020 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:125439 Training (for short 'DoPT') vide Office Memorandum dated 11.01.2016 has directed all the Ministries/Departments to complete selection process within 6 months from the date of advertisement. The respondent-NIT in its meeting of Board of Governors held on 05.04.2016 has adopted aforesaid Office Memorandum dated 11.01.2016.
The respondent vide advertisement dated 01.10.2019 advertised four posts of Professor. In the advertisement, eligibility to apply was prescribed. As per eligibility criteria, the applicant either must have completed 10 years' service post Ph.D. or have 13 years' experience, out of which 7 years should be post Ph.D. On account of lack of requisite experience, at the time of impugned advertisement, the petitioners could not apply for the advertised post.
4. The respondent with respect to aforesaid advertisement, as required by Office Memorandum dated 11.01.2016, could not complete selection process within 6 months from the date of advertisement. The selection process included scrutiny of applications and interview of eligible candidates. The petitioner No.1 on 24.02.2020 became eligible for the post of Professor as she secured 7 years' experience post Ph.D. and other petitioners at a subsequent point of time became eligible for the advertised post.
The respondent with respect to advertised posts conducted interview on 20/21.11.2020 and selected candidates, however, on account of aforesaid interim order and pendency of CWP No.30552 of 2019 before this Court, the result could not be declared.
The aforesaid writ petition on 31.08.2023 has been dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh with better particulars.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia submits that in view of Office Memorandum dated 01.01.2016 read with minutes of meeting dated 05.04.2016 of Board of Governors, the respondents were bound to complete selection process within 6 months from the date of advertisement whereas respondents even did not initiate process within 6 months from the date of advertisement. The respondent issued advertisement on 01.10.2019 and as per aforesaid instructions, selection process was supposed to be completed by 01.03.2020. The instructions issued by DoPT have been adopted by Board of Governors of respondent, thus, instructions are binding and mandatory in nature. Strict non- compliance of aforesaid instructions has prejudiced future prospects of the petitioners because they became eligible for the advertised post on 24.02.2020 and by that date, the respondent had not conducted interview. The respondents were supposed to consider candidature of the petitioners either by way of issuing corrigendum to impugned advertisement or by way of issuing fresh advertisement. The instructions read with minutes of meeting of Board of Governors are mandatory in nature, thus, respondents were duty bound to complete the selection process within 6 3 of 18 Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:125439 CWP-19409-2020 (O&M) -4- 2023:PHHC:125439 months as prescribed in the instructions. As soon as period of 6 months expired from the date of advertisement, the advertisement itself ceased to exist and respondents were bound to issue fresh advertisement or in alternative consider candidature of the petitioners. The delay in completion of selection process has resulted into denial of opportunity to petitioners, thus, advertisement deserves to be set aside or modified to the extent the petitioners are also considered alongwith those candidates who applied pursuant to the impugned advertisement.
13. From the conspectus of Office Memorandum read with minutes of meeting of Board of Governors, it can be gleaned that DoPT has issued advisory to different Ministries/Departments to complete recruitment process within 6 months from the date of advertisement. The instructions have neither been issued in exercise of any statutory power nor to a particular department. No consequence, in case of non- adherence, has been provided for. It has been instructed that selection process/recruitment process 'may be' completed within 6 months. A public duty has been enjoined up authorities dealing with recruitment process but no right in favour of applicants or future candidates has been created. The instructions do not seem to intend that the process would be vitiated in case of its strict non-compliance. Adoption of instructions by BOG of the respondent does not change their colour and contour. If instructions are declared directory, no prejudice, at least violation of 15 of 18 Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:125439 CWP-19409-2020 (O&M) -16- 2023:PHHC:125439 fundamental or vested rights, is going to cause to the petitioners, whereas, if these instructions are declared mandatory dire consequences are going to take place. The case in hand cannot be examined in isolation because these instructions are applicable to each advertisement of posts and every Central Government Department. There may be couple of reasons for not completing selection process within 6 months from the date of advertisement e.g. large number of applicants, preliminary followed by final examination, interview of large number of candidates, scrutiny of documents with limited staff etc. If the instructions are declared mandatory, every selection process would be vitiated on the expiry of 6 months from the advertisement. It would prejudice public at large at least where it is not humanly possible to conclude the process. There may be a case where selection is at its fag end but period of 6 moths from the date of advertisement expires. In such cases, invalidation of selection process would cause irreparable loss to applicants as well as recruitment agency.