MOHD YOUSUF Vs. STATE OF J & K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) He that takes the procedural sword, shall perish with that sword." The aforesaid words of Justice Frankfurter in Vitarelli v. Seaton, 1959(3) Law Ed. 2d 1012, though said in a different context would apply to the petitioners also. They do not want the double edged procedural sword to be used against them. They came to be appointed without following due procedure but are claiming that in the matter of termination, procedural safeguards should be followed.

(2.) On the last date of retirement, the then Director Health Services issued letter of appointment in favour of the petitioner and 57 other persons. Some of them were appointed on temporary basis; others came to be appointed on stop-gap basis for a period of sixty days. This happened on 31.3.1998. Next day i.e. 1.4.1998 the new incumbent to the office of Director Health Services issued a telegram. This was to the effect that all appointment orders issued on 31.3.1998 are to be kept in abeyance. It was further indicated that this would be subject to the final decision which may be taken by the State Government. Some of the appointees approached this Court immediately after order dated 1.4.1998 was passed. Interim orders came to be issued by this Court.

(3.) The further fact is that on 12.5.1998 the Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. Health and Medical Education department passed further order. The fact that the then Director Health Services had made the appointment of 58 candidates to the various posts in non-gazetted cadre and class IV posts on the eve of his retirement was taken note of. It was observed that as these appointments were made without following due procedure which was required to be followed in the matter of making appointment to public service, the letters of appointment issued by the then Director Health Services on the eve of his retirement were cancelled with immediate effect. The orders which were ordered to be kept in abeyance on 1.4.1998 were given a final shape. The net result was that the orders of appointment were cancelled. The names of the employees who were likely to be affected by this order were mentioned in the schedule appended to the order passed on 12.5.1998.