Court’s Decision
The Gauhati High Court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the selection and appointment process for Grade-IV posts at B.N. College, Dhubri, ruling that the selection was conducted fairly and in compliance with applicable rules. The Court found no merit in the petitioners’ demand for weightage in the selection process based on their long-standing temporary service, as there was no provision for such weightage in the advertisement or the relevant rules.
Facts
- The petitions concerned a selection process for Grade-IV posts in B.N. College, Dhubri, initiated through an advertisement dated November 22, 2022.
- The petitioner had been employed on a temporary basis as a Grade-IV employee at the college since December 1, 2006, and had applied for regularization, expecting consideration for his experience.
- Despite being informed that due weightage would be given, no weightage was provided during the selection.
- The petitioner participated in the selection process, which included a written examination and an interview but was not successful. Following this, the petitioner challenged the selection process.
Issues
The primary issue was whether the petitioner, having rendered long service on a temporary basis, was entitled to any preference or weightage in the selection process for regular appointment to a Grade-IV post.
Petitioner’s Arguments
- The petitioner contended that the college had assured him of weightage for his service in the selection process, yet no such weightage was granted.
- He argued that his continuous service and the college’s alleged assurance warranted either regularization or some preference in the current selection process.
- The petitioner also cited the Supreme Court’s judgment in Uma Devi (3) to support his claim for weightage, highlighting the Court’s observation about considering long-term service during regular recruitment.
Respondent’s Arguments
- The college authorities argued that the recruitment was conducted in line with government guidelines, which did not provide for any weightage based on prior temporary service.
- The State submitted that the Assam College Employees Provincialization Rules, 2010, which governed the process, do not support weightage for prior temporary service.
- The private respondents emphasized that the petitioner, having willingly participated in the selection process, could not challenge it after being unsuccessful.
Analysis of the Law
- The Court referred to the principles in Uma Devi (3), which discourages regularization of employees appointed irregularly without proper authority or contrary to statutory rules.
- The Court noted that the 2010 Assam College Employees Provincialization Rules require open recruitment based on merit and do not provide for weightage for prior temporary service, reinforcing the fairness of the selection process.
Precedent Analysis
- The Court reviewed precedents on candidates challenging recruitment processes post-participation. Cases such as Karunesh Kumar and Karnati Ravi held that unsuccessful candidates who participated in the process without objection are estopped from challenging it afterward.
- The cited judgments emphasize estoppel and acquiescence principles, restricting unsuccessful candidates from challenging the criteria or process after participation.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court found that the petitioner’s reliance on Uma Devi (3) was misplaced as the observations on weightage were specific to the case’s circumstances and not universally applicable. It determined that the petitioner had no entitlement to weightage as per the guidelines or advertisement, and his participation in the process signified acceptance of the criteria.
Conclusion
The Court dismissed the petitions, holding that the petitioner was not entitled to weightage based on his temporary service, and that the selection was conducted fairly, transparently, and in accordance with statutory rules.
Implications
The judgment reinforces the principle that temporary service does not automatically warrant weightage in regular recruitment unless explicitly provided for by rules or advertisements. It also underscores the estoppel principle, preventing candidates from contesting selection criteria after voluntarily participating in the process. This judgment may impact similar cases where temporary employees seek regularization or weightage based on prior service.
Also Read – Bombay High Court Directs Police Officer’s Presence in Long-Delayed Case Without Charge-Sheet