WRIT PETITION 10 of 2022 on 25 September 2001

Conclusion

College

Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Sharma,Dileep Kumar,Sanjeev Singh

Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.,V.P. Mathur

With

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 50462 of 2006

Petitioner :- Smt. Varsha

Respondent :- State of U.P. and Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Shukla,Dileep KumarCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

Heard Shri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for thepetitioner. None appears for the respondent. Nameof counsel for the respondent is shown in the causelist.

The petitioners were appointed as Operation TheatreTechnicians on a temporary and ad-hoc basis. Theprocess or the manner of appointment was clearlythrough the backdoor. Educational qualifications ofthe petitioners to hold the sensitive post of anOperation Theatre Technician are not disclosed inthe writ petition. The appointments did not confer anyright upon the petitioners. Their services wereterminated simplicitor after one week of working. Thepetitioners were granted an interim order when they approached this Court by instituting this writ petition.

The petitioners continued to work on the strength ofan interim order for long years.

The writ petition was dismissed in the year 2001.However, despite the dismissal of the writ petition,the petitioners were allowed to work as OperationTheatre Technicians. They remained on the rolls ofthe State hospital without any lawful basis.

The petitioner no. 1 has superannuated from serviceon 31.05.2021.

The petitioner no. 2 died in the year 2006. His wifewas granted a compassionate appointment in theyear 2006. On the date of his death, her husbandwas not in lawful employment of the State hospital.The appointment of petitioner no. 2 was illegal andvoid ab initio. However, she too was permitted tocontinue in office.

The state of affairs is indeed shocking and theapathy of the officials to countenance the illegalappointments is a matter of grave concern.

The submission of the learned counsel for thepetitioner that the matter may be consideredsympathetically is misconceived. Grossly illegalappointments cannot be validated by the Courts onmisplaced sympathies. Appointments to public offices are strictly regulated by service rules and also constitutional provisions which contemplate absoluteprobity and full transparency in the process ofappointments. The Courts cannot hold to thecontrary by legitimating illegal appointments onsympathetic considerations.

The Principal Secretary, Medical Education,Government of U.P., Lucknow, shall cause anenquiry to be conducted against the officialsresponsible for this state of affairs and takeappropriate action as per law.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petitions aredismissed.

A copy of this order be placed before PrincipalSecretary, Medical Education, Government of U.P.,Lucknow for necessary compliance.

College

Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Sharma,Dileep Kumar,Sanjeev Singh

Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.,V.P. Mathur

Re: Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 10 of 2022

This is a delay condonation application supported byan affidavit.

Though, cause for delay is not sufficient and thedelay is not liable to be condoned. However, in theinterest of justice and to ensure a finality to thecontroversy on merits, the delay is being condoned.The application is allowed.

Court No. - 35

College

Counsel for Petitioner :- A.K. Sharma,Dileep Kumar,Sanjeev Singh

Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.,V.P. Mathur

Re: Civil Misc. Recall/Restoration Application No. 11 of 2022

Heard Sri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for thepetitioner.

This is an application to recall the order dated25.09.2001, whereby this petition was dismissed forwant of prosecution. It is supported with an affidavit.

Though the reasons given in the restorationapplication for non appearance of learned counselfor the petitioner on 25.09.2001 are not sufficient.However, in the interest of justice and to ensure afinality to the controversy on merits, therestorationapplication is allowed.

The order dated 25.09.2001 dismissing the petitionfor want of prosecution is recalled.

The petition is restored to its original number andstatus.