- (1.) R. B. Misra, J. Heard Sri S. K. Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Sameer Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondents. Copy of the counter-affidavit has not been placed on record, however, by courtesy of the learned Counsel for the petitioner himself counter-affidavit has been seen and it has been taken into consideration and the rejoinder-affidavit is available on record.
(2.) IT appears that the petitioners appeared for selection to the post of Conductor and according to the petitioners a select list was prepared in the year 1980 and their names were reflecting in the said select list. However, out of 414 candidates of the select list 291 candidates were appointed as Conductor and remaining persons were left. However, when list was cancelled, according to the petitioners, they should have been given appointment to the post of Conductor by virtue of being selected and included in the select list and not appointing the petitioners and inviting fresh applications to the post of Conductor in future is contrary to the principles of natural justice unless the candidates of list prepared in the year 1980 were completely absorbed. Counter-affidavit has been filed. According to the respondents before creation of the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation with effect from 1-6-1972 under Section 3 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950, the transport services in the State of U. P. were being provided by the erstwhile U. P. Government Roadways, which was at that time a department of the State Government. The U. P. State Road Transport Corporation was created with effect from 1-6-1972 under Section 3 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 and it succeeded in toto assets and liabilities of the erstwhile U. P. Government Roadways, and for administrative reasons, the Roadways Organisation has been divided into a number of Regions throughout the State. In each region a select list/waiting list of drivers and conductors is prepared which is valid for one year or till the next select list is prepared. The candidates included in the select list are given short term appointment against short term vacancies which may arise due to sudden absence, sudden illness, suspension etc. of regular employees or during melas or marriage seasons so that smooth operation of the transport services is not affected and the travelling public at large is not inconvenienced. According to the respondents, the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation framed regulations known as U. P. State Road Transport Corporation Employees (other than officers) Service Regulations, 1981 under Section 45 (2) (c) of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 laying down the terms and conditions of service for its employees. Regulation 20 provides the procedure for direct recruitment, which reads as under : "20 (1) For the purposes of direct recruitment, the appointing authority shall constitute a Selection Committee comprising not less than three members. (2) The Selection Committee shall scrutinise the applications and require the eligible candidates to appear in a competitive examination/trade test and/or in interview as the appointment authority may decide. Note.-The syllabus for competitive examination shall be such as may be prescribed by the appointing authority from time to time. (3) The Selection Committee shall, having regard to the need of securing due representation of the candidates belonging to the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other categories in accordance with Regulation 12, call for interview such number of candidates as they consider proper. (4) The Selection Committee shall prepare a list of selected candidates in order of their proficiency as disclosed by the aggregate of marks obtained by them in the written test/trade test and/or interview. If two or more candidates obtain equal marks, the person getting higher marks in the written test/trade test shall be placed higher, and where the selection is made on the basis of interview only, the person older in age shall be placed higher. The number of names in the list shall be larger (but not larger by more than 5 percent) than the number of vacancies. The Selection Committee shall forward the list to the appointing authority. (5) The list prepared under sub-regulation (4) shall remain alive for one year from the date it is finalised by the selection committee or till the date of next selection, whichever is earlier. " According to the respondents, in view of anticipatory requirement for the post of the conductors during one year advertisements are published in the newspapers inviting applications from the candidates, who possess the necessary qualification for being considered for the appointment to the post of conductors. Similar notices were published by various regions of the Corporation in the year 1979. The State Government in exercise of powers under Section 34 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, 1950 had issued directions to the Corporation on 30-8-1979 laying down the criteria for preparation of the select list/waiting list, and on that basis the Managing Director, U. P. State Road Transport Corporation, Lucknow on 2-11-1979 issued a circular. Accordingly the select list/waiting list for the year 1980 was prepared and selected candidates were imparted training after completing necessary formalities and they were informed that they will be given appointment on their turn as and when vacancy arises. According to the respondents since the select list/waiting list had not been prepared in accordance with the quota fixed by the State Government for various categories, therefore, the said list of the year 1980 in all the regions of the Corporation in the State was cancelled by the Managing Director by an order dated 15-7-1980. Even though the candidates included in the select list had no right to be appointed to the post after cancellation of the select list and the following writ petitions were filed by them challenging the order dated 15-7-1980, by which the select list/waiting list had been cancelled. However, all the writ petitions were dismissed on merits after perusing the counter-affidavit : (I) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 10441-A of 1980; Hanuman Sahai v. UPSRTC. (II) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8593-A of 1980, Rajesh Kumar and others v. UPSRTC. (III) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8674-A of 1980, Shiv Saran Lal v. UPSRTC. (IV) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8589-A of 1980, Suresh Kumar v. UPSRTC. (V) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 9415-A of 1980, Parash Nath v. UPSRTc (VI) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8588-A of 1980, Arun Kumar Srivastava v. UPSRTC. (VII) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 10442-a of 1980, Shiv Shankar v. UPSRTC. All the above writ petitions were dismissed by this Court (Hon'ble Mr. Satish Chandra, the Chief Justice, and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. N. Verma) on 16-12-1980. (VIII) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 427-A of 1981, Shiv Nand Ram v. UPSRTC, was also dismissed on 8-1- 1981 by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. N. Singh and Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. Banerji. (IX) Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 3334 (A) of 1981, Krishna Kumar Pandey v. UPSRTC and 7162-A of 1981 (Santosh Kumar Dhawan v. UPSRTC, filed for same relief was also dismissed by this Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. N. Shukla and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jauhari) on 14-8-1981 and 30-7-1981 respectively. (X) Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7735-A of 1981, Pradeep Kumar v. UPSRTC, filed for similar relief was dismissed on 30-9-1981 this Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yashoda Nandan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Haider ).
(3.) ACCORDING to the respondents, thereafter the select lists were prepared the year 1981 and thereafter, in the year 1982. One of the candidates namely Rijwan Ahmad of 1981 select list filed a writ petition 28- 1-1987 before this Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice B. D. Agarwal and Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. P. Singh, JJ.) with the prayer "to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus to take back into service the two candidates of select list, which was prepared in the year 1981", but the writ petition was dismissed on the same day on the ground that the petitioner had only been included in the select list and after 1981 select list had been superseded by subsequent list, they had no right to claim appointment. ACCORDING to the respondents, in view of agitation by the Union of the Corporation, the Head Office of the Corporation vide circular dated 17-10-1984 has asked the Regional Managers to submit the names of those conductors of 1980, 1981 and 1982 select list : (a) Those who had completed 240 days of service in the Corporation. (b) Those who had completed less than 240 days of service in the Corporation. (c) Those who had not worked even for a day but had deposited security money and had been imparted training. (d) Those who had been only imparted training. (e) Those who had neither been imparted training nor had deposited security amount. According to the respondents, since there was need of conductors during peak season (for the period from 16-4-1985 to 15-7-1985) another circular was issued by the Head Office on 16-4-1985 (Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition) directing the Regional Managers to give appointments to those conductors of 1980, 1981 and 1982 select list on daily wages : (a) Who had completed 240 days of service. (b) Who had worked for less than 240 days. (c) Who had been imparted training and had deposited security money etc.;