Indian
Express: Chandigarh: Friday, 11 December
2015.
TWO
chief justices of the Punjab & Haryana High Court made as many as two dozen
“public” appointments to Class III and IV posts over 10 months in 2014 without
advertising the jobs first despite a Supreme Court ruling in February that year
specifically laying this down as a condition.
Information
obtained by The Indian Express under the RTI Act shows 64 appointments since
2010 just on the basis of single-page applications, waiving off requirements
such as written test and interview, to posts of clerks, peons and restorers.
Twenty-four of those appointments came after the apex court ruling.
In
many cases, the appointees did not attach educational certificates, age proof
or photograph with their applications. And the language in the applications was
near identical – “I have come to know from some reliable sources that some
posts of peons/restorers are lying near-identical applications vacant.”
Records
show the judges made the appointments under Rule 38 of the High Court
Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1973. Rule 38
reads, “Where the Chief Justice is satisfied that the operation of any rule
causes undue hardship in any particular case, he may by order dispense with or
relax the requirements of that rule to such extent and subject to such
conditions as he may consider necessary for dealing with the case in a just and
equitable manner…”
The
documents accessed by The Indian Express don’t cite “undue hardship” in case of
any appointee.
In
its February 12, 2014, judgment, the Supreme Court had said, “There can be no
doubt that the employment whether of Class IV, Class III, Class II or any other
class in the High Court or courts subordinate to it fall within the definition
of public employment.” Therefore, all high courts were directed, “the post
shall be filled up by issuing the advertisement in at least two newspapers… one
of which must be in vernacular language having wide circulation in the
respective state”.
Directing
all high courts to amend their rules accordingly, the order further said, “…
powers under Article 229 (2) of the Constitution (Chief Justice’s power to make
rules) cannot be exercised by the Chief Justice in an unfettered and arbitrary
manner. Appointments should be made giving adherence to the provisions of
Articles 14 (equality before law) & 16 (equality of opportunity in matters
of public employment) of the Constitution and/or such rules as made by the
legislature… What has been deprecated by this court time and again is ‘backdoor
appointments’.”
Records
show that in each of the 24 appointments in the Punjab and Haryana High Court
since February 2014, officials lower down the order quoted from the Supreme
Court order so that the judges were aware of what they were doing.
Sanjay
Kishan Kaul as chief justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court (he is now
Madras High Court Chief Justice) cleared eight such appointments.
After
him, Acting Chief Justice Ashutosh Mohunta (now retired) facilitated 16 such
appointments, some of whom were either over-age or did not fulfill educational
criteria.
When
reached in Chennai, Justice Kaul said, “How am I supposed to remember now about
Class IV appointments? I don’t recollect.”
A
Chandigarh resident submitted a December 3, 2014, dated application, and was
issued an appointment letter the next day. The case file noting shows that
Acting Chief Justice Mohunta was apprised that only 14 posts of restorers were
vacant, for which an advertisement had already been issued, and that since
Justice Mohunta had already appointed two more restorers earlier, only 11 posts
would be left for general public.
A
peon working in the Punjab Advocate General office applied on September 26,
2014, and on September 30, Justice Mohunta wrote, “Be appointed as restorer.”
When
contacted, Justice (retd) Mohunta said, “There were previous precedents in the
high court. I went by precedents. I can’t answer every case without seeing
files.”
.JPG)
.JPG)
