Service Law – Appointment / Recruitment – Of Drivers in appellant-transport Corporation – High Court while holding the entire recruitment process to be bad as the appointments were made solely on the basis of marks allotted in the viva test, directed the appellant-transport corporation to appoint respondent no.1 as Driver with seniority as per his merit position without any back wages – Plea of appellant–transport corporation before Supreme Court that 14 years have passed from the date of the recruitment and there are changed circumstances due to which it is not possible now to actually reinstate/appoint respondent no.1 on the post of driver – Held: On facts, as on today, no post of driver is available – All the subsequent appointments are now being made on contractual basis and through contractors – As on today, the age of respondent No.1 would be approximately 49 years while the retirement age of a driver is reported to be 55 years – If respondent No.1 is to be appointed now as driver, he will have to clear the driving test to drive the bus on the road – Considering the overall facts and circumstances, at this stage, actual appointment of respondent No.1 is not possible – However, with a view to do substantial justice, respondent No.1 awarded lumpsum compensation of Rs.7.5 lakhs in lieu of actual appointment with 6% interest from September, 2013 onwards till the actual payment is made to respondent no.1.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD:1.1. Considering the fact that the appointments were made solely on the basis of the marks allotted in the viva test, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, insofar as holding the entire recruitment process bad, does not call for any interference. [Para 5][851-D]
AND ORS.
1.2. It is however pointed out that as on today, no post of driver is available. All the subsequent appointments are now being made on contractual basis and through contractors. As on today, the age of the respondent No.1 would be approximately 49 years. The retirement age of the driver is reported to be 55 years. If respondent No.1 is to be appointed now as driver, he will have to clear the driving test to drive the bus on the road. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, the actual appointment of respondent No.1 is not possible. Therefore, if respondent No.1 is awarded a lumpsum compensation in lieu of actual appointment as a driver with reasonable interest, the same can be said to be in larger interest and can be said to be doing substantial justice. [Para 5][851-E-H]
2. The appellant-transport corporation shall pay a sum of Rs.7.5 lakhs to respondent No.1 as compensation with 6 per cent interest from September, 2013 onwards till the actual payment is made. It will be open for the appellant to recover the same from respondent No.2. However, the initial liability to pay the aforesaid amount would be on the appellant. [Para 6][852-C-D]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.