DIRECTOR NAVODAYA VIDYALAYA SAMITI Vs. ANSUYA PRASAD POKARIAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts in brief are that the present respondent was appointed as Principal in Navodaya Vidyalaya on deputation basis by the Director, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti by order dated 28.4.95. This appointment was made initially for a period of 2 years. It was extended for one year by order dated 10.7.96 to be expired on 21.6.97. Thereafter, an order was issued on 27.3.98 for repatriation w.e.f. 30.4.98. This order was challenged by the present respondent by filing a writ petition before the Gauhati High Court assailing the action of the present petitioners in repatriating him in his parent department instead of absorption in the post which he was holding on deputation. The High Court passed an interim order suspending the order of repatriation. The said petition was eventually transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Central Administrative Tribunal after hearing the parties directed the respondents/petitioners herein to consider the case of the respondent for permanent absorption in the post of Principal in conformity with the law. The said order was passed on 5.6.2001. Pursuant to the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, the present respondent made a representation. The representation was considered and by an order dated 20.8.2001 the prayer for absorption in the department was rejected on the ground that he cannot be absorbed for want of vacancy and consequent thereof the orders were issued on 29.8.2001 and 3.9.2001 repatriating the present respondent from his post from 3.9.2001. This order was challenged by filing a petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Central Administrative Tribunal by its order dated 27.3.2001 has quashed the order of repatriation dated 29.8.2001 and directed the respondents to pass appropriate orders according to law and pay the salary and allowances which is said to be not paid to the present respondent since 1.8.2001. Further direction was issued that till completion of the above exercise for absorption by the present petitioners/respondents the applicant shall hold the post of Principal, NVS which he is holding on the basis of the order dated 23.4.98 passed by the High Court in Civil Rule No. 14/1998. The petitioners herein were also directed to pass necessary order for absorption of the respondent/petitioner on and from the appropriate date in accordance with law. This order was passed on the basis that the reasons given for non-absorption of the respondent/petitioner in the post for nonavailability of post was found to be nonexistent. The Tribunal has held that the order of non-absorbing the applicant has been issued taking into account the factors which were irrelevant and extraneous and in derogation of the policy of absorption. The Tribunal has reached to the conclusion that the department has no right in saying that the posts were not available for absorption of the petitioner, on the fact of the admitted fact that the authority themselves had advertised 40 vacancies for appointment on deputation basis by Employment News dated 13.10.2001 accordance with the provision of law applicable to the employees of Navodaya Vidyalaya.

(2.) The Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti has framed Rules in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 24 of the Rules of Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, the Executive Committee of the Samiti for regulating the method of recruitment to all the posts in Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti. These Rules are called Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Recruitment(Revised) Rules, 1995. Under Sub-rule (III) of Rule 2 of the Rules, 1995, it is provided as under:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the notification dated 21.6.2001 cannot be said to be the amended of the Rules unless and until the amended Rule is rectified by the Executive Committee or unless there is anything placed on record showing that the Executive Committee has delegated its power to the Chairman, NVS to amend the Rules in this regard. The learned counsel has brought to our notice Rule 24 of the Rules under which the Executive Committee was given powers to frame regulations, not inconsistent with the Rules, for the administration and management of the affairs of the Society. Sub-rule(d) of Rule 24 authorises the Executive Committee to create posts and lay down procedure for selection and appointment of the officers and staff of the Society, the schools and the other institutions managed by the Society, subject to the conditions as may be prescribed by the Government of India from time to time, provided that prior consent of the Government of India would be necessary, if the maximum of scale of pay of the post exceeds Rs. 1600 per month. Thus the creation of posts and procedure for selection and appointment of the officers and staff of the Society it to be guided by the Rules framed by the Executive Committee.