Court Issues Quo Warranto Against Ineligible Sub Engineers; Prescribes Strict Adherence to Recruitment Rules
In a landmark judgment, the Chhattisgarh High Court has declared the appointments of 89 sub engineers in the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development void ab initio due to their failure to meet essential eligibility criteria as per the cut-off date stipulated in the recruitment advertisement. The court, presided over by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, issued a writ of quo warranto against these appointees, highlighting the importance of strict adherence to statutory recruitment norms to prevent unauthorized occupation of public office.
The recruitment process, initiated by an advertisement dated February 23, 2011, sought to fill 275 vacant posts of Sub Engineer (Civil). However, during verification, it was discovered that several candidates, including private respondents No. 4 to 73, acquired their qualifications after the cut-off date of March 23, 2011, rendering their appointments illegal. Despite findings from three committees and notes from the Joint Secretary indicating the appointments were not legally proper, the State Government did not take action to terminate their services.
The court emphasized that appointments made in violation of essential eligibility conditions are nullities, and confirmation of service does not cure this defect. It ruled that administrative instructions cannot override statutory rules and that eligibility must be assessed with reference to the cut-off date, not subsequent acquisition of qualifications.
Two respondents, No. 55 and 64, who possessed requisite qualifications prior to the cut-off date, were deemed eligible to continue in their positions. The judgment also noted that although the affected respondents have served for nearly 14 years, their appointments cannot be sanctified based on length of service, confirmation, or absence of fraud.
The court recognized the undue hardship caused by the State's lapse in adhering to proper recruitment procedures, thus holding that payments and dues made to these respondents would not be recoverable. This decision underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding the integrity of public employment and ensuring transparency in recruitment processes.
Bottom Line:
Recruitment to public posts must strictly adhere to statutory rules and eligibility criteria fixed on the cut-off date. Appointments made in violation of such criteria are void ab initio and cannot be sanctified by length of service, confirmation, or absence of fraud.
Statutory provision(s): Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, Section 156(3) CrPC, Sections 420 and 468 IPC.
Ravi Tiwari v. State Of Chhattisgarh, (Chhattisgarh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2848516
