Stalling Whole Recruitment Process Antithetical To Public Interest: J&K High Court Lifts Freeze On Recruitment To 1395 Posts Of Panchayat Secretary

Directing official respondents to finalize the selection process expeditiously Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed,

“…This Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose will be served to extend the interim directions, which are being harshly working against the interests of the candidates, who have since been selected and not being appointed due to the rider imposed by this Court”.

Background:

These directions came as a response to petitions filed by contractual Gram Rozgar Sevaks (GRSs) employed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). The petitioners had challenged the recruitment notification issued by the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, fearing they would be excluded if the existing posts were filled through direct recruitment.

The petitioners had premised their argument on a proposed amendment to the J&K Rural Development (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules, 2007, which included GRS as a feeder category for promotion to Panchayat Secretary. However, this amendment was still under consideration and hadn't been officially notified.

Upon considering these petitions the court had earlier passed interim directions which were harshly operating against the respondents. They argued that the petitioners' claims were premature and based on mere apprehension and highlighted that the MGNREGA scheme hires staff purely on a contractual basis, and there's no provision for their permanent absorption under existing recruitment rules.

Highlighting the adverse impact of the interim directions on the selection process and the functioning of the department they submitted the urgent need for manpower and urged the Court to allow the recruitment process to proceed unhindered.

Observations Of The Court:

Clarifying the legal position that draft rules hold no statutory force unless formally Justice Nargal observed,

“..Draft rules unless accepted and takes the form of statutory flavor, cannot be relied upon for taking any benefit, particularly, in view of the existence of already applicable statutory rules in place.accepted and notified “.

The bench clarified that the petitioners, who served as Gram Rozgar Sevaks under the MGNREGA Scheme, were engaged on a contractual basis, distinct from the sanctioned positions of Village Level Workers (VLWs). The existing recruitment rules mandate that VLW positions be filled according to established procedures, not according to a rejected draft proposal. Thus, the bench affirmed that the petitioners' claims did not contravene prevailing recruitment regulations.

Although the interim directions issued by the Court were specific to posts within certain districts, Justice Nargal expressed concern over the impact on the overall selection process. It highlighted that despite no restraint orders for certain district posts, the respondents had refrained from proceeding further due to the existence of a composite select list based on district preferences.

The Court also considered the larger public interest and the hardships caused by the stalled recruitment process. It drew support from Prabhjot Singh Mand and others Vs. Bhagwant Singh and ors., reported in (2009) & “Yogesh Kumar Thakur Vs. Guru Ghasidas Sahiya Avam Sanskriti Academy and ors 2023 and observed,

“Court, accordingly, is required to consider not only the interest of the parties, but also the larger interest of services, as also the element of public interest whether to continue the interim orders or to vacate the same by stalling the whole recruitment process, which not only causes injury to the large number of employees, who are deprived of the right of consideration for appointment, but is also antithesis of public interest and adversely affect the service as a whole”.

Acknowledging the crucial role of the selection process in maintaining administrative efficiency, the court concluded that continuing the interim orders would not serve any fruitful purpose.

While vacating the interim stay order, Justice Nargal clarified that the selection and appointment of candidates will be subject to the final outcome of the writ petitions. The next hearing for these petitions is scheduled for May 31, 2024.

Case Title: Shafket Ali and ors Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 93

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment