T.LOKACHARI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether appointment of 3rd Respondent-Dr.M.A.Atmanand as Director in National Institute of Ocean Technology, Chennai was in violation of statutory rules and whether the learned single Judge was right in dismissing the Writ of Quo Warranto are the points falling for consideration in these intra-court appeals.

(2.) Background facts:- Ministry of Earth Sciences (for short 'MoES') is forecasting the monsoons and other weather/climate parameters, ocean state and other phenomena related to earth systems through well integrated programmes. MoES also deals with science and technology for exploration and exploitation of ocean resources (living and non-living). National Institute of Ocean Technology (for short 'NIOT'), Chennai is one of the autonomous Institution attached to MoES. MoES is vested with the responsibility to make an appointment of Director of Institute. Appellant in W.A.No.2128 of 2011 (Dr.S.Kathiroli) was the Director of NIOT on contract basis with effect from 01.09.2004 for a period of five years. On expiry of his tenure on 31.08.2009, the Search-cum-Selection Committee under the Chairmanship of Dr.Shailesh Nayak, Secretary, MoES was constituted. For identifying suitable persons for the post of Director, requests were sent to the Heads of Departments to nominate suitable candidates in order to have a wider choice. The Search-cum-Selection Committee was formed and the Committee short listed seven candidates for personal talk/interview. The Search-cum-Selection Committee interviewed six candidates as one of the candidate viz., Dr.V.S.N.Rao Tatavarti did not appear for interview. The Committee recommended the name of 3rd Respondent-Dr.M.A.Atmanand to be appointed as Director, NIOT for a period of five years. With the approval of competent authority, 3rd Respondent was appointed as Director for a period of five years and he assumed office on 21.10.2009.

(3.) Appellants filed Writ of Quo Warranto contending that 3rd Respondent's appointment was against the Rules and he is occupying the post without possessing essential qualifications. It is the case of Appellants that as per the information obtained under RTI Act, there are no separate recruitment rules framed for the post of Director, NIOT and that the notified recruitment rules for MoES are applicable to its autonomous bodies also. It is averred that post of Director is equivalent to Scientist Grade 'G' and therefore, Respondents 1 and 2 ought to have followed the recruitment rules. For Scientist Grade 'G', the prescribed years of experience is 23 years in Teaching / Research and Development / Survey / Administration / Planning / Supervision / Training shall be in the field of Oceanography or Marine Technology and the same cannot be reduced to 20 years. 3rd Respondent obtained Doctorate degree only in the year 1997 from the Indian Institute of Technology and as such 3rd Respondent does not have 20 years of requisite qualification and he has approximately only 12 years in the field of Oceanography and Marine Technology. 3rd Respondent does not have requisite five years of minimum term as Head/Leader of an independent Technical Programme/Institution. The application of 3rd Respondent was not routed through proper channel and his appointment as Director, NIOT is in clear violation of recruitment rules and the Appellants prayed for issuance of Writ of Quo Warranto that 3rd Respondent is holding the post without fulfilling the essential qualification and experience prescribed under the recruitment rules.