PRAMOD HEMRAJ Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts show that the employer of petitioner, i.e. respondent nos. 2 & 3 received permission dated 12.2.1999 from respondent no.1 to fill in the post and accordingly, they immediately issued advertisement on 13.5.1999. In response to the selection process conducted, appointment order was issued to petitioner on 10.1.2000. The appointment order was in purely temporary capacity. Proposal was submitted for approval and it was sent back on 11.4.2000 by respondent no.2. Major objection raised is about lack of experience. The proposal was resubmitted and respondent nos. 3 & 4 pointed out their minority status and also submitted that petitioner was duly qualified. It appears that on 20.8.2001 again proposal was sent back. However, at that juncture no objection on the ground of absence of experience was raised. On 12.6.2002 sanction has been refused by inviting attention to the policy decision of Government dated 29.6.2000. By said policy decision, State Government did not permit recruitment on posts which were lying vacant in excess of six months prior to 29.2.2000. It is in this backdrop that petitioner has approached this Court.

(2.) This Court has on 27.8.2002 issued Rule on interim relief and it appears that petitioner continued in services of respondent nos. 3 & 4. On 29.10.2002 after hearing all concerned, this Court issued Rule in the matter and then observed that respondent nos. 3 & 4 will be entitled to reimbursement of salary paid to petitioner.

(3.) Ms. A.R. Kulkarni, learned A.G.P. for respondent no. 1, has invited our attention to reply affidavit filed before this Court. Reply affidavit filed by respondent no.1 shows that because of abovementioned policy decision dated 29.6.2000, the recruitment effected was found unsustainable and, therefore, sanction was refused. However, learned A.G.P. has also produced before us a communication dated 29.9.2017 sent by office of respondent no.1 informing the office of Government Pleader that petitioner has been regularized from 18.2005 and is also paid salary regularly from that date. This communication is taken on record as Exh. "X". The learned Counsel for petitioner is seeking time to obtain instructions about this communication. However, in present situation we are not inclined to adjourn the matter. Copy of Exh. "X" is also given to the learned Counsel for petitioner.