RAJKUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appointments of lecturers in Govt. Medical College, Jammu, in relaxation of eligibility and on adhoc basis have been challenged in these petitioners on a number of grounds with the prayer for a direction to remove them from their respective places of postings being the usurpers of public offices. It is prayed in the alternative that the petitioners be appointed as Lecturers in various departments of the Medical College, Jammu. Such petitioners who are Registrars have further prayed that the respondents be restrained from disturbing their place of postings till they attain 3 years teaching experience for being eligible to apply for the post of lecturers in their respective faculties in the Central Government Institutes, In another batch of petitions prayer is made for issuing appro ­priate directions to the respondents to allow the petitioners therein to continue as Registrars in the Medical College, Jammu, with a direction to the respondents for not appointing any other person to the afore ­said posts of Registrars against the posts held by them. It is also prayed that the petitioner -Registrars be allowed to complete their 3 years term and directions be issued to the - respondents to appoint them as Lecturers by relaxation of the rules. Writ Petitions No. 153/88, 134/89, 168/90, 178/90 and 541/90 pertain to first category (Lecturers) as referred to hereinabove whereas Writ Petitions No. 833/88,208/89, 181/90,360/90 and 429/90 pertain to the second category (Registrars).

(2.) IT is alleged by the petitioners that a number of vacant posts of lecturers exist in the two medical colleges of the State which have not been filled up by the respondents in accordance with the rules applicable in the case. It is submitted that the respondent namely, Dr. M. Bakhshi, Dr. Tariq Parvez Azad, Dr, Narrinder Mohan, Dr, Jatinder Singh, Dr. Raj kumar Sharma, Dr Jai Pal Singh and Dr. R Gupta, were initially appointed as adhoc lectures and permitted to continue to hold the posts despite expiry of period of more than 3 years. Respondent Dr. M. Bakhshi is alleged to have been appointed as permanent lecturer arbitrarily and without the legal authority Res ­pondent. Dr. Tariq Parvez and Dr. Narrinder Mohan are also alleged to have been appointed in the same manner. It is alleged that on account of continuous appointments of the aforesaid doctors as lecturers, the chances of the petitioners and other eligible candidates for appoint ­ment as lecturers in the medical colleges of the State have been made bleak. It is alleged that the petitioner fundamental right of equality under Articles 14, 15 & 16 of the federal Constitution have been vio ­lated. It is further alleged that the respondents have prescribed 3 years experience of teaching as Registrars for being eligible to be considered for the post of lecturer and no doctor is permitted to serve more than 2 years for the post of Registrar under the orders issued by the respon ­dent -State. The appointment of the respondents on adhoc basis is alleged to be violative of the Jammu & Kashmir Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules"). It is alleged that the appointments have been made with ­out reference to the Public Service Commission (for short PSC) or advertising the posts and affording all the eligible candidates an oppor ­tunity to apply and be considered for appointment to the aforesaid posts. In Writ Petition No. 168/90 besides the appointments of Dr. Tariq Parvez Azad and Dr. Narrinder. Mohan, adhoc appointment of Dr. Anita -Sharma has also been challenged. It is alleged that the adhoc appointees are usurpers of the public offices and liable to be removed by the issuance of a writ of quo warranto. Continued retention of respondent No. 7, Dr. Paramjit Singh as Registrar has also been challenged being malafide with a view to facilitate his appointment as lecturer after completion of 3 years experience as Registrar. The relaxation of qualifications ordered by the Government is alleged to be without the authority of law. It is alleged that last PSC was held for the appointment of lecturers in the medical colleges in the State in the year 1986 and thereafter the posts of lecturers were never advertised through the PSC denying all the eligible candidates to apply and be considered for the posts of lecturers. In Writ Petition No. 178/90, appointment of Dr. Sudhir Bhagotra and Dr. R. K. Mengi, as lecturers in relaxation of the rules has been challenged on the same grounds with a further prayer for the issuance of a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue to hold the post of Registrars till selection to the post of lecturer is made. In Writ Petition No. 541/90, besides the appointment of Dr. Tariq Parvez Azad, Dr. Narrinder Mohan, the appointment of Dr.A.Q. Salaria, has been challenged by the petitioner on identical grounds.

(3.) IN Writ Petition No. 153/88, a prayer has been made to quash the selection of respondents 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9 therein as lecturers in the Deptt. of Medicine in Govt. Medical College, Jammu, with a further prayer for the issuance of a command to respondents 1 & 2 to appoint the petitioner as lecturer in the Dept. of Medicine in the said college. It is, however, admitted that the appointments of the aforesaid respon ­dents have been made by the Government vide orders impugned herein dated 1.6.1987 on the recommendation of the PSC. It is, however, alleged that as the respondent Dr. Krishen Lal Gupta has not joined the post of lecturer despite his appointment, a direction be issued to the respondents to appoint the petitioner in his place as he possessed the requisite qualifications are was erroneously not considered for appointment by the PSC. It is alleged that the PSC wrongly held the petitioner not possessing the requisite qualification of teaching experience. In Writ Petitions No. 833/88, 208/89, 181/90, 360/90 and 429/90 it is alleged by the petitioners that they have completed their MD/MS in various disciplines and were selected for the post of Registrar for a period of 2 years. It is submitted that the petitioners were entitled to hold the posts of Registrars for a period of 3 years in order to be eligible for consideration for appointment to the post, of lecturer within and outside the State. It is submitted that under the rules governing the selection of lecturer, a candidate is required to have teaching experience of 3 years and if the petitioners are not permitted to remain posted as Registrars for a period 3 years, they will not be in a position to compete with others who -were allowed to held the posts of lecturers for the aforesaid period of 3 years and disallowing the others is arbitrary, unconstitutional and illegal. In Writ Petition no. 208/89, it is prayed that the respondents be directed to consider the petitioner for appointment as registrar as per govt. order No. 633 -HME of 1984 dated 19.9.1984 and restrain the respondents from applying or enforcing govt. Order. No. 670 -HME of 1982 dated 13 -10 -1982.