GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. MCD AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) The applicants/petitioners seek clarification in light of the order made by another Single Judge in contempt proceedings - C.P. No.175/2008 and 200/2008 on 5.5.2014.

(3.) The applicants are successful writ petitioners; they had approached this Court by filing W.P. (C) 1164/1989 and 2252/1989 whereby their non-selection as Vaids in the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) was challenged. Their allegations in the writ proceedings were that the MCD, contrary to its procedure, had accepted direct applications from several candidates and proceeded to appoint them. The MCD's position was that the petitioners were not entitled to be considered for appointment for various reasons, including that some of them had not approached through the Employment Exchange. During the pendency of the writ proceedings, the Court had directed five vacancies to be earmarked/reserved, in the ultimate event of the petitioner's succeeding in the proceedings. Eventually, by judgment and order dated 30.10.2006, the writ petitions were allowed. This Court held that the recruitment process had suffered from incurable infirmities and that the petitioners were unjustly denied consideration on the ground that they had applied directly and were not sponsored by the Employment Exchange; the same condition has been waived by the MCD to appoint as many as 17 others. Having rendered these findings, the final judgment of 30.10.2006 sought to balance the equities in light of several judgments of the Supreme Court (referred to in paragraph-32). Accordingly, the following directions were issued: -