RAMANAND GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners who had been given Intermittent appointments on the posts of seasonal collection Amin during the period 1978 to 1992 have filed this writ petition claiming a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint them as seasonal collection Amin for the current collection season and to consider them for their absorption as regular collection Amins. THE petitioners have also filed certificates issued by the Tahsildar showing that they had worked Intermittently during the aforesaid period and the last appointment granted to them ended on 30-9-92. THE certificates also indicate that the work and conduct of the petitioners had been satisfactory.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent-authorities have been acting in a most arbitrary manner by adopting the method of pick and choose while making appointments as against the vacancies in the posts of seasonal collection Amins It has been asserted that persons who are much junior to the petitioners are granted appointment on the post of seasonal collection Amins ignoring the persons who are senior and more experienced. It is also asserted that more than often the respondents totally ignore the seniority and though suitable persons with sufficient experience to their credit are available for being appointed on the post of seasonal collection Amin yet the respondent-authorities offer the appointments to fresh candidates for which there can be no justification.

(3.) FROM the materials on the record, however, it is clear that a seniority list of seasonal collection Amins who have had been working in the District has been maintained by the appointing authority on the basis of the period of service rendered by a person as seasonal callection Amin. In the circumstances, therefore, instead of making appointment as against the vacancies in the posts of seasonal collection Amins by adopting a pick and choose method the respondent-authorities should make use of the seniority list of seasonal collection Amins maintained by them and utilise the services of experienced seasonal collection Amins. This Court vide its decision in the case of Nav Bahar Singh v. The District Magistrate, Moradabad and others (Special Appeal no. 157 of 1992 decided on 5-11-92) had observed that collection Amins who are given seasonal appointments should be preferred and given appointments in accordance with their seniority-cum-efficiency. The respondents shall therefore, maintain an accurate record of seasonal collection Amins who had been working with them in order of seniority for the purpose of fixation whereof the respective periods of service should be reckoned. 6 In the circumstances of the case, to avoid arbitrariness, it further appears to be necessary to direct that while making appointments of seasonal collection Amins in future, the respondent-authorities shall ensure that persons whose names are borne on the seniority list maintained as indicated above should, subject to availability, be given appointments on the posts of seasonal collection Amins strictly on the basis of seniority-cum-efficiency and adhering to the orders regarding reservations of the posts issued by the State Government, if any. It is further observed that such list shall be utilised for making ad hoe appointments as against substantive vacancies, as well. 7. In the result the writ petition is disposed of finally with the directions and observations as indicated hereinbefore. 8. Let a certified copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioners on payment of usual charges within three days.