D.P. WADHWA, J. - (1.) THE Judgment of the court was delivered by
(2.) TEN appellants in this appeal are aggrieved by the order dated 4/8/1995 of the central Administrative tribunal (for short "the tribunal") dismissing their petition. They had approached the tribunal seeking to quash: (7 the order dated 19-5-1986 modifying the dates of their regularisation as Lower Division Clerks (LDCs) and (2 the order dated 27/3/1991 of the Chief Administrative Officer, Safdar Jung Hospital, New Delhi issued in pursuance of the advice received from the Director General Health Services, government of India, terminating their appointments as regular LDCs till regular candidates sponsored by the Staff Selection Commission took their position. The appellants who were working as LDCs in the hospital represented against the order dated 19-5-1986 which had been issued in suppression of the earlier order dated 3/12/1985 changing their dates of regularisation. Instead they were visited with the order threatening to terminate their services. The appellants have been now working as LDCs for varying periods from 18 to 20 years allegedly on ad hoc basis. Their contention is they have been regularly appointed as per statutory rules. Before us, however, they have given up their challenge to the order dated 19-5-1986 faced with, perhaps, the consequence of losing their jobs altogether. Before the tribunal there were 11 petitioners and one (Mr Udal Singh) seems to have dropped out from these proceedings. The central government in the exercise of power under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution framed rules called The Safdarjung Hospital (Class III Posts) Recruitment Rules, 1973. Under these rules, method of recruitment for LDCs is 100% by direct recruitment; age-limit is 18 to 25 years; educational qualification is matriculation or equivalent with speed of 30 w.p.m. in typewriting (and a certain relaxation for a physically handicapped person); period of probation prescribed is three years; and the selection is by DPC. These rules were made on 17/12/1973 and were published in the Gazette of India on 5/6/1974. By resolution dated 4-11- 378 1975 of the government of India, Cabinet Secretariat in the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, a decision was taken to set up a Subordinate Services Commission ("SSC" for short). Apart from the constitution of the SCC, the resolution also prescribed its functions. It is to make recruitment to Non-technical Class III posts in the Departments of the government of India and in the Subordinate Offices except those posts for which recruitment is made by the Railway Service Commission, etc. The Commission is to conduct examinations for recruitment to Non-technical Class III posts in the Subordinate Services in the Ministries/Departments of the government of India and their attached and Subordinate Offices as may be specified from time to time. Since recruitment to the posts of LDCs in the hospital is to be made through SSC, a requisition was sentry the hospital authorities for filling up the posts of LDCs existing in the hospital. SSC by its letter dated 30/4/1977 informed the hospital that the qualified candidates could be expected to be available only in early 1978 and if the vacancies were required to be filled up urgently, the authorities might themselves make arrangements to fill up these vacancies through other authorised channels. In this view of the matter, the hospital authorities asked the local employment exchange to sponsor candidates though with clear indication in the requisition that the recruitment would be purely on ad hoc basis till candidates from SSC were made available. Simultaneously a circular was also issued in the hospital allowing eligible departmental candidates to apply for the LDCs posts till SSC nominees were available. The employment exchange sponsored 27 candidates and there were 18 departmental candidates. A written test was conducted on SSC pattern and those who obtained 50% marks and above were selected for the typewriting test. 10 candidates sponsored by the employment exchange were empanelled on the basis of their performance. Similarly, 8 departmental candidates were separately empanelled based on their performance. It is the contention of the petitioners that these panels were prepared after process of selection by duly constituted DPC for the purpose had been gone through as per the Recruitment Rules. Appointments to the posts of LDC were made from these panels as and when the need arose. In all, 17 such appointments were made, 7 of these in 1978, 4 in 1979 and 2 in 1981. Of all these 13 candidates who were recruited as LDCs, one left the service and one retired subsequently leaving II of them who, as noted above, were petitioners before the tribunal. In the offer of appointment letters as well as the orders of their appointment, it was made clear that the appointments were purely on ad hoc and temporary basis and the appointees against the vacancies would be reverted or retrenched as and when candidates sponsored by SSC joined duty or in the case of leave vacancies when the incumbents returned from leave.
(3.) IT is the contention of the respondents that on the basis of memo dated 7-8-1982 received from the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms staling that special examination for recruitment of LDCs was scheduled to be held on 12/12/1982 for ad hoc LDCs to make them regular, a circular was issued in the hospital on 11/10/1982 requiring the 17 LDCs 379 which included the petitioners to submit their applications along with requisite documents by 13/10/1982 to participate in the examination and that in case they failed to appear in the examination on the specified date and time their appointment to the post of LDCs was liable to be terminated. IT is stated that 16 LDCs took the examination out of which only four qualified. The result was declared on 20/3/1983 and instructions were issued that the seniority of the finally qualified candidates may be fixed en bloc junior to the candidates who had been appointed as a result of 1981 Clerks Grade Examination. The petitioners nevertheless continued in their respective jobs. Trouble for them arose when they were put down in the seniority and ultimately when their services were sought to be terminated. IT is not disputed before us that the selection of the appellants was, not made in accordance with the Recruitment Rules or that regular vacancies did not exist against which the appellants were appointed. It may be noticed that Petitioners 1 to 5 are employment exchange nominees and remaining are from the hospital staff. One of the specimen letters appointing the petitioners is reproduced as under: "BHARAT SARKAR SAFDARJUNG HOSPITAL, NEW DELHI Immediate No. 1468 Dated 8-9-78 H.P.PART II Miss Vijay Gupta is appointed as LDC in this hospital w.e.f. 24-8-78 F.N. temporarily till further orders Rs 260.00 p.m. in the pay scale of Rs 260-6-290-EB-6-326-8-366-EB-8-390-10-400 plus usual allowances as admissible under the rules from time to time vice Sh. K.S. Sehrawat appointed as Storekeeper. Her date of birth is 10/10/1953. She had passed the typing test. Sd/- (P.N. Sorewala) Administrative Officer. Copy to: Accounts Section in triplicate along with Medical Fitness Certificate. She has been medically examined and found fit. Pay and Accounts Officer/Leave Group/P. File/CR Dossier." ;