Dr. Mayank Gupta And Ors vs Medical Superintendent And Ors

L. Narasimha Reddy, J

The Medical Superintendent of Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, issued an advertisement in the year 2014 inviting applications for appointment of Post Graduates in Medical Studies as Senior Residents. It was mentioned that the initial tenure will be for 44 days in two cases, and 89 days in one case, extendable up to three years, and that their appointments will be ad hoc in nature. The other qualifications, such as, experience, age limit and emoluments are also mentioned therein.

The applicants herein responded to the advertisement and were selected and appointed as Senior Residents. Their tenure was also being extended on expiry of 44 or 89 days, as the case may be, and as of now, they have completed more than two years of Senior Residency.

Through office order dated 18.09.2018, the respondents appointed five Senior Residents, and in the remarks column thereof, it is mentioned that as and when the candidates so appointed join, the services of the Senior Residents who are working on ad hoc basis would be terminated. The applicants feel aggrieved by this action of the respondents and filed this OA. They contend that once they have been found fit to be appointed as Senior Residents, albeit on ad hoc basis and worked contentiously for more than two years, there is absolutely no basis for terminating them, that too without issuing any notice or without mentioning any reason. Reliance is placed upon the order passed by this Tribunal on 03.02.2015 in OA No.160/2015.

We heard Shri Jaideep Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. Mrs. Harvinder Oberoi, learned counsel for the respondents obtained instructions and argued at length. She contends that the appointment of the applicants was purely on ad hoc basis, whereas that of the five Senior Residents is after identification of the vacancies and applying the principles of reservations, on regular basis through advertisement dated 13.08.2018. She further contends that in the orders of appointment in respect of the applicants it was mentioned that their appointment is liable to be terminated at any stage without notice.

In the ordinary course, an employee appointed on ad hoc basis, has to give way as and when a regular appointment is made against that very vacancy. This naturally contemplates there being a totally different process of selection when the appointments are on regular basis. In the instant case, we have closely compared the parameters of selection of the candidates, in pursuance of the advertisement issued in the year 2014, on the one hand and those contained in the advertisement dated 13.08.2018 filed as Annexure A-1 on the other. Except that, the emoluments for those who were regularly selected are stipulated as Rs.67,000/- as per 7th CPC, as against a less sum for ad hoc appointees, there is no difference as regards the selection process. No written test is stipulated for regular selection, obviously because the appointment is only for three years. When both the selections are on the basis of interview alone, we do not find any qualitative difference between both the modes of selection and appointment.

One can understand if the applicants are being discontinued on finding that their performance is not satisfactory. There is not even a remote indication to that effect.

The effort and anxiety of the applicants is not without any basis. The completion of Senior Residency for a period of three years would confer benefit and status to a Post Graduate Medical Student, in the context of being considered for appointment as Assistant Professor or other related posts. If the applicants are discontinued at the end of their tenure, the entire process undergone by them virtually becomes redundant. Further, their appointment is against certain positions and not against any specific civil posts. The applicants have rendered their services to the respondents at a time when there was acute shortage of Senior Residents. The reciprocation cannot be in the form of abruptly discontinuing them unceremoniously. Added to that, the continuance of the applicants is not going to come in the way of the regularly selected persons being appointed.

We, therefore, allow the OA and direct the respondents to continue the applicants till they complete the tenure of three years and not beyond that.

All the MAs are also disposed of.