AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The appeal from an interim order dated 610 2005 is summarily disposed of.
The respondent has not appeared; that is not unusual; what is unusual is that the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, one Deepak Mani has made an endorsement on the Court papers �only for Monday (14112005)�.
It is not for the learned Advocates to fix the date for their cases; it is for the Court to do so. We deeply disapprove of this type of endorsement. If no amends are made, it was for the authorities might take steps in this regard.
So far as the interim order itself is concerned, it seeks to continue until regular filling up of vacancies, several employees in the Cooperative Bank. The entries were apparently irregular and no selection was undertaken. The Deputy Registrar of the Cooperative Societies has raised objection to the appointments in three letters, the dates of which are mentioned in the judgment.
His Lordship has opined that the irregularly appointed employees had a right of hearing. If the appointment was backdoor, then such backdoor entries can be cancelled not because of any fault during discharge of duty by the irregular employees, but because the method of entry is against public policy. A personal hearing is not in point at all.
If the respondentswrit petitioners are permitted to continue until regular filling up, then there will be practical difficulties in the filling up of posts; usually the officers tend to let the status quo continue and often enough it is found after 1015 years that the irregularly inducted employees have rendered very long service. As until date their length of service is only five years; sooner this type of irregular appointment to is discontinued, the better. The writ petition will no doubt be heard, but no interim order should be passed.
Order and observations without prejudice to the final hearing.
The appeal is allowed. The interim order is set aside.