SANAM GIRI Vs. SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF SIKKIM AND OTHERS
LAWS(SIK)-2010-4-2
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
Decided on April 03,2010

Sanam Giri Appellant
VERSUS
Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Government Of Sikkim And Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Barin Ghosh, J. - (1.) In this second round of litigation, the writ petitioner is repeating his prayer for regularisation on almost identical grounds except one, to be discussed below.
(2.) The first round of litigation initiated pursuant to a writ petition filed in 2001 was decided by a Division Bench of this Court by a judgment and order dated 19.5.2004. As will be evident from the Said judgment and order, the writ petition sought for a direction for regularisation of his service as Lecturer in Sociology in the Government College of Sikkim, which is also the prayer in the second round of litigation initiated by presenting the present writ petition in the year 2007. In the first writ petition it was contended that Sujata Basnet, S.S. Mahapatra, D. Purohit and J. Nayak were appointed as Lecturers on ad hoc basis and similarly Bhaskar Chakraborty, Sudan Pradhan and Pramila Gurung were appointed as Lecturers on ad-hoc basis. It was contended that the petitioner too was appointed as Lecturer on ad-hoc basis. It was Stated that all those seven persons were subsequently regularized, but the petitioner was not regularised for no just reason. The Division Bench found as a fact that neither the petitioner, nor any of those seven persons had N.E.T. qualification to their credit. The Division Bench also found as a fact that requirement of N.E.T. became necessary when the University Grants Commission Regulations, 1991 came into effect. The Division Bench found as a fact that Sujata Basnet, S.S. Mahapatra, D. Purohit and J. Nayak were appointed as ad- hoc Lecturers before the said Regulation came into effect. The Division Bench declared that at the time of.,appointment of those four persons as Lecturers on ad-hoc basis, qualification of N.E.T. was not a requirement and accordingly not having N.E.T. could not St and in the way of regularisation of ad-hoc appointment of those four persons. The Division Bench also found as a fact that though in 1991 the Said Regulation came into effect, but on 12.11.1993 the Government of Sikkim made the Sikkim Government College Lecturers Recruitment Rules, 1992 where it was provided that non-N.E.T./S.I.E.T. candidates shall be considered, but if selected, they should clear either N.E.T. or S.L.E.T. within five years of their appointment. The Division Bench further found as a fact that the Sikkim Public Service Commission issued an advertisement on 20th October, 1993, to which a corrigendum was added. which invited applications from aspirants to fill up posts of Lecturers with a condition that candidates without N.E.T./S.L.E.T. qualification shall also be considered, but if selected, they should be obliged to clear N.E.T./S.L.E.T within five years of their appointment. The Division Bench found as a fact that Bhaskar akraborty, Sudan Pradhan and Pramila Gurung responded to the Said advertisement and were selected. In view of such selection, those persons were appointed as Lecturers but with a condition that they would have to clear either N.E.T. or S.L.E.T. within five years from the date of their appointment. The Division Bench further found as a fact that none of the Said three persons could clear N.E.T. or S.L.E.T. within five years of their appointment and accordingly the Government gave them two more years time to clear the Same. The Division Bench found that none of the Said three persons could clear either N.E.T. or S.L.E.T. even within the extended period of time. It however, noticed that in terms of the Said Regulation of 1991 as well as the subsequent Regulation of 2000, the University Grants Commission is alone competent to grant relaxation in the prescribed qualification and that an approach has been made to U.G.C. for relaxation of N.E.T./S.L.E.T. qualification of Sudan Pradhan and that U.G.C. is likely to take decision in relation thereto. The Division Bench also noted that Bhaskar Chakraborty has resigned. The Said judgment and order of the Division Bench does not speak a word as regards relaxation of N.E.T./S.L.E.T. qualification of Pramila Gurung. The Division Bench found that while Bhaskar Chakraborty, Sudan Pradhan and Pramila Gurung were selected through a selection process initiated by an advertisement, Sujata Basnet, S.S. Mahapatra, D. Purohit and J. Nayak, who were appointed on ad-hoc basis between the years 1988 and 1991, but prior to coming into force of the 1991 Regulations, were interviewed by a Board, as was constituted by the Sikkim Public Service Commission, consisting of high dignitaries for the purpose of ascertaining their suitability to continue to serve as Lecturers and only upon Satisfaction of such suitability their appointments on ad-hoc basis were regularized; whereas at the time when the petitioner was appointed on ad-hoc basis and even subsequent thereto his suitability to serve as a lecturer had not been assessed by any competent authority. The Division Bench, therefore, declared that the petitioner cannot seek regularisation of his ad-hoc appointment as Lecturer on the touchstone of regularisation of ad-hoc appointment of Sujata Basnet, S.S. Mahapatra, D. Purohit and J. Nayak. The Division Bench also declared that since appointment of Bhaskar Chakraborty, Sudan Pradhan and Pramila Gurung was the resultant effect of a selection process initiated pursuant to an advertisement based on Sikkim Government College Lecturers Recruitment Rules, 1992, the petitioner cannot equate himself with Bhaskar Chakraborty, Sudan Pradhan and Pramila Gurung. In the Said writ petition, as will be evident from the Said judgment and order of the Division Bench, the petitioner had contended that if N.E.T./S.L.E.T. Stands in the way of petitioner being regularized, Bhaskar Chakraborty, Sudan Pradhan and Pramila Gurung having not been able to acquire N.E.T. or S.L.E.T., their appointment should go. The Division Bench despite such contention declared that there is no infirmity or illegality in the appointment of Bhaskar Chakraborty, Sudan Pradhan and Pramila Gurung. However, taking note of the fact that University Grants Commission is competent to relax qualification of Lecturers, it directed consideration by the University Grants Commission, the case of relaxation of N.E.T./S.L.E.T. qualification of the petitioner.
(3.) The University Grants Commission considered the case of relaxation of N.E.T./S.L.E.T. of the petitioner through its Exemption Committee, but did not agree to give exemption.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.