High Court Directs NIT Srinagar To Pay ₹5 Lacs Compensation Over Unjustifiable Delay In Appointing Candidates Selected As Jr. Engineers

The court also imposed Rs. 2 lacs cost on the two persons who were serving in NIT as Jr. Engineers on contractual basis for filing frivolous cases to stall the regular selection process.

Justice Sanjeev Kumar took a strong note of the mushrooming growth in frivolous litigations and said: "To serve the cause of justice and to keep the stream of justice unsullied, it is imperative for the Courts to act tough and discourage the tendency of some litigants to misuse the process of law."

The court was dealing with the petition filed by the candidates duly selected as Jr. Engineers in NIT, Srinagar. The petitioners had sought directions upon the NIT authorities to issue orders of appointment in their favour.

The NIT administration, apparently, were not finalising the appointment despite having undertaken a proper selection process, in the year 2021, because of the pending litigation.

The two other candidates, working against the posts of Jr. Engineer, on a Contractual basis, had approached the High Court and the court had allowed them to continue on the posts till the regular selection to fill up the posts of Jr. Engineers is concluded.

The contractual Jr. Engineers apprehending the High Court directions aren't sufficient for them to continue on the posts for perpetuity approached the Civil court and managed to get the status quo, which was later on stayed by the appellate court, after the petitioners in the present petition appealed against the status quo order. All this was done by the applicants (persons engaged as contractual Jr. Engineer) while the writ petition was pending in High Court.

The court noted that the writ was very smartly withdrawn from the civil court to avoid any trouble.

These contractual candidates in the present writ petition were seeking their impleadment as respondents to press their contention that they have been working for a long time against the said posts, on a contractual basis, and have thus acquired the right of regularisation.

Their claims, however, did not bode well with the court as they had been appointed on "purely contractual" basis and according to their engagement order, as court noted, their appointment was terminable at any time.

Given the nature of their engagement as Contractual Jr. Engineers, the court termed their claim for regularisation 'misconceived'.

The court observed: "Time has come to stay firm on frivolous litigation lest it will prevent the Courts from taking up good causes involving adjudication of vital constitutional and other statutory rights of the citizens. It would be no exaggeration to say that a major portion of Court time is wasted in hearing and weeding out frivolous litigation."

The court further said that the Imposition of costs on the applicants is a warning to frivolous litigants that they should refrain from such attempts or they will certainly face serious consequences.

After dealing with the two applicants who were protesting the selection of petitioners, the court roped in the NIT Srinagar for delaying the appointment order of the duly selected petitioners.

The court did not accept the argument of NIT Srinagar that the delay was caused due to pending litigation in Civil Court and High Court.

The court said that the status qua ordered by the Civil court was stayed by the appellate court, after the petitioners challenged the order, and therefore there was no impediment for the NIT to complete the appointment process.

The court said, NIT withheld the offer of appointment to selected petitioners with a view to accommodate the persons who were holding posts on contractual basis "to enable them to play spoilsport by indulging in frivolous litigation."

The Court questioned as to why the orders of appointment in favour of the petitioners were not issued even after the status qua was stayed by the appellate court.

"[It] is quite intriguing and, in any case, without any cogent and justifiable explanation tendered herein by the respondents. It is a case where the things speak for themselves. The delay in offering the appointment letters to the petitioners after 29.01.2022 is, thus, mala fide and for ulterior consideration," the court observed.

Holding petitioners entitled to appointment orders the court directed the Director NIT to issue the requisite offers of appointment to the petitioners and appoint them against the posts they have been selected in, after scrutinising their documents.

The court further held the petitioners are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs.5.00 lacs (2.50 lac each), to be paid by respondent Director NIT. The orders are to be complied with within 2 weeks.

However, court made it clear that the director on payment of compensation to the petitioners shall be entitled to recover the same from the officer on whose account the appointment of the petitioners has been delayed.

"Should there be any non- compliance of this order, the Registry shall frame Robkar and place it before the appropriate Bench for orders," Court said.