Court Upholds Temporary Appointment; Directs Corporation to Make Regular Appointment Within Six Months
In a notable judgment delivered by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the court dismissed a writ petition challenging the re-appointment of a retired officer as Chief Engineer on a contractual basis by the M.P. Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. The petitioner, Satyabir Singh, sought to quash the reappointment of Respondent No. 2 and the advertisement for deputation, arguing that as the senior-most Executive Engineer, he was entitled to the position.
The court, presided over by Justice Jai Kumar Pillai, examined the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh TRIFAC Service Rules, 2017, which govern the appointments. The court highlighted that the post of Chief Engineer is to be filled by promotion or deputation, requiring seven years of experience in the feeder cadre of Superintendent Engineer, which the petitioner did not possess. Consequently, the petitioner was deemed ineligible for the post of Chief Engineer.
The court also addressed the issue of the contractual appointment of Respondent No. 2, noting that such appointments are permissible under Rule 20.3 of the M.P. TRIFAC Service Rules, 2017, as a stop-gap arrangement to meet immediate administrative exigencies. The court found that the engagement of the retired officer was not arbitrary or illegal, as it was carried out within the statutory framework and did not require prior approval from the State Government.
In its decision, the court emphasized that seniority alone does not confer a vested right to promotion, and administrative discretion in appointments is valid unless tainted by mala fides or statutory violations. The court directed the respondent corporation to complete the process of regular appointment to the post of Chief Engineer within six months, ensuring compliance with the applicable rules.
The court's judgment reflects the importance of adhering to statutory provisions in appointments and reaffirms the principle that judicial intervention is warranted only in cases of statutory violations or demonstrable arbitrariness.
Bottom Line:
Seniority alone does not confer a vested right to promotion or appointment to a higher post. Administrative discretion in temporary or ad-hoc appointments, if exercised in accordance with statutory provisions, cannot be curtailed by judicial intervention unless vitiated by mala fides or statutory violations.
Statutory provision(s): Madhya Pradesh TRIFAC Service Rules, 2017, Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Contractual Appointment) Rules, 2017, Article 226 of the Constitution of India
