Delhi High Court
Sachin Kumar & Ors vs Union Of India & Anr on 4 September, 2019
$
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 04.09.2019
+ W.P.(C) 6391/2019
SACHIN KUMAR & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Sumit Sharma, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Jitesh Vikram Srivastava and
Mr.Prajesh V.S., Advocates for R-1.
Mr. Mehmood Pracha and Mr. R.H.A.
Sikander, Advocates for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.CHAWLA
JUDGMENT
A.K. CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)
By the instant petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, the petitioners, seek to maintain challenge to the recruitment
process initiated vide advertisement dated 26.03.2019, which provides
weightage of 10% to the contractual employees.
2 At the onset, it would be pertinent to note that the petitioners had
originally filed the petition extending challenge to Rule 11(2) of FSSAI
Recruitment Regulations, 2018 in short, 'the Regulations, 2018' as also the
recruitment process initiated vide advertisement dated 26.03.2019. In view
of the fact that there was also a challenge to a Rule under the Regulations,
2018, the writ petition was earlier heard by the Division Bench and during
the course of hearing, the petitioners dropped the challenge to the subject
rule and the relief prayed in the petition was restricted to the challenge
extended to the process of recruitment initiated vide advertisement dated
26.03.2019.
3. In the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
weightage in selection process to the persons on contract in the services of
the respondent, which is not to exceed 10% of the total score for the entire
selection process, was unreasonable and could not be recognized under law
and therefore the process initiated to fill any post vide advertisement dated
26.03.2019, was perverse and not sustainable.
4. The very submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, is
wholly misconceived on at least two counts. Firstly, any challenge extended
to the subject rule of the Regulations, 2018, which provide for weightage,
having been not in question, the ensuing process of recruitment vide
advertisement dated 26.03.2019, cannot be faulted with. Secondly,
weightage to be given to the persons on contract in the services of the
respondents, as per the advertisement as per clause VI, is not to exceed 10%
of the total score for the entire selection process and then, is also to be
guided by the parameters laid for the purpose, as under:
"VI. All persons on contract in the services of
the Authority on the date of notification of the
Recruitment Regulations shall be eligible for
weightage in selection process. The weightage
shall be given on two parameters viz. number
of years of service rendered in the Authority
(30% weightage) plus performance Appraisal
(70% weightage). The performance appraisal
shall be done by a committee nominated by
Appointing Authority. The weightage as
above shall be added at the first level of
selection as applicable to each post and the
total combined weightage on account of both
parameters (i.e. no. of years of relevant
experience plus Performance Appraisal)
should not exceed 10% of the total score for
the entire selection process."
The forgoing weightage to be given to the persons on contract,
in the considered view of the court cannot be said to be unreasonable
and providing for unbridled exercise of discretion, assuming arbitrary,
to give any undue favour to anyone.
5. For the forgoing reasons, there is no merit in the petition and the
same is dismissed.
A.K. CHAWLA, J.
SEPTEMBER 04, 2019/dm
