GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER FOR MD. SHAHIDUL ISLAM V/S UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS

GUWAHATI, India, Feb. 25 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Jan. 27:

1. Heard Mr. A. K. Purkayastha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. C. K. S. Baruah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Mr. B. K. Singh, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 to 8.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 03.09.2022 whereby the General Manager (Region) of the Food Corporation of India (FCI) had rejected the representation of the petitioner on the ground that the recruitment/appointment to the category of Group III/IV posts in the FCI is done through open competitive examination with specific advertisement issued for such appointment as per the recruitment rules.

3. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner was engaged in the category of Group III in the FSD, Senchowa sometime in the year 2013 and the petitioner thereupon has been rendering continuous service. The petitioner has submitted representations before the Respondent Authorities for regularizing the services of the petitioner. However, as the representation submitted by petitioner was not considered, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition which was registered and numbered as WP(C) No. 2309/2022.

4. The further facts of the case as is apparent from the records is that on 01.04.2022, the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court had directed the General Manager (Region) FCI, Regional Office to examine the petitioner's representation dated 02.08.2018 and to take a decision on the same in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. Pursuant thereto, the Respondent Authorities in the FCI, more particularly the respondent No.9 had passed the impugned order dated 03.09.2022 whereby the petitioner's representation was rejected on the ground that the petitioner is seeking appointment in the FCI for the category-III/category-IV post. However, the recruitment/appointment to the categoryIII/category-IV post in the FCI is done through open competitive examination with specific advertisement issued for such appointment as per the recruitment rules. It is also mentioned that the petitioner may apply for any of the advertised posts whenever such advertisement is issued subject to meeting the eligibility criteria for the post. It is also categorically mentioned in the order dated 03.09.2022 that the petitioner was never employed by the Corporation in any capacity whatsoever and there had never been any employer/employee relationship.

5. This Court has heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and has also perused the materials on record. The enclosures to the writ petition, nowhere show that the petitioner was issued any appointment letter by the FCI at any point of time. Be that as it may, it is pertinent to take note of that the respondents in the FCI vide the impugned order dated 03.09.2022 categorically stated that the recruitment/appointment to the category-III/IV post in the FCI is done through open competitive examination with specific advertisement. Under such circumstances, any direction(s) if passed by this Court to regularize the services of the petitioner would be in the teeth of the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi (3), reported in 2006 (4) SCC 1.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x3zudQWPXvVb5JIDDQ97gIfUhASSESszKDD7cbFi5%2BiY&caseno=WP(C)/54/2026&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010271532025&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.