UNION OF INDIA Vs. GORDON KYNSAI NONGKYNRIH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal seeks to challenge the judgment and order dtd. 1/12/2022 passed in WP(C) No. 96 of 2022 whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent herein was disposed of with a direction to the appellant to consider the case of the writ petitioner for treating his appointment in a substantive/ permanent capacity.

(2.) The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology along with nine others have assailed the aforesaid judgment of the writ court in the present appeal.

(3.) Dr. N. Mozika, learned DSGI appearing for the appellant submits that the Aizawl centre, which was created in the year 2009, did not adhere to the recruitment rules of NIELIT (formerly DOEACC) which stipulated the essential qualification for the post of Scientist "C" as 1st Class B.E./recognized equivalent qualification with not less than 65% marks; or M. Tech/M.E./M. Design or Ph.D. (Engg.) and inserted M.Sc. in relevant field without any basis while issuing the advertisement. He further submits that the Aizawl centre also ignored the twin instructions contained in the letter dtd. 10/12/2009 issued from the headquarters of DOEACC and published the said advertisement for filling up vacancies on regular/deputation basis, including permanent absorption instead of stating that the post were to be filled up temporarily, on short term basis and would be transferred to Itanagar as and when required. He submits that the selection committee also miserably erred in recommending the name of the writ petitioner who had only an M.Sc. degree which is not equivalent to B.Tech. or M.Tech. and till date, the writ petitioner has not acquired the requisite qualification. He contends that the advertisement was issued in violation of the prevalent recruitment rules and the instruction dtd. 10/12/2009 and the writ petitioner, as such, cannot claim regularization of service. Referring to the offer of appointment dt. 10/8/2010, the learned DSGI submits that the appointment was on short term contract basis for a period of 5(five) years and the writ petitioner having accepted it, cannot now claim appointment in substantive/permanent capacity with effect from the date of his joining.