NIZAMUDDIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition seeks a direction to the respondents to confirm/regularize the petitioner on the post of Sub-Inspector (Executive), RPSF with immediate effect with his seniority and also a direction to the respondents to frame a policy for confirmation/regularization of the employees promoted on ad-hoc basis in a time bound manner.

(2.) THE petitioner who had joined the RPSF as a constable in 1984 was promoted by an order passed on 26th January, 2009 to the post of Sub-Inspector (Executive) on ad-hoc basis till a regular selection is held. The order clearly stated that the same did not confer any right upon the employee to claim seniority or other benefits of regular promotion. The initial appointment for a period of 90 days was extendable for another 90 days after a break of one day. In this background, on 26th January, 2009, the petitioner and others so promoted on ad-hoc basis were restored to their substantive appointments as Assistant Sub-Inspector. After a break of one day, they were re-promoted on ad-hoc basis vide order dated 18th May, 2009. It has been explained by the respondents, and is not disputed, that these appointments on ad-hoc basis were only as a stop gap measure keeping in view the large number of vacancies in the rank of Sub-Inspector/Executive.

(3.) IT is undisputed that the petitioner accepted the action of the respondents and each time participated in the selection process but had failed to qualify in the aforenoticed three attempts against the notified vacancies. It has further been explained that the notification dated 21st July, 2009 notified the vacancies which had been calculated/notified as per the provisions of Rule 70.4 of RPF Rules, 1987 taking into account the existing vacancies and anticipated vacancies of the next 12 months and 10% of such total vacancies. As per Rule 70.3, number of candidates called for selection under Rule 71 were required to be three times the number required to be empanelled.