FACTS:
Mr. Rajnish Kumar filed a petition in the name of public interest litigation questioning the functioning of appellant, Ranchi Municipal Corporation and its financial accountability. During the pendency of the writ petition, the Division Bench of the High Court passed an order whereby the appellant was restrained from making appointment on any post. As a consequence, no recruitment could be made against 1333 sanctioned class-III and class-IV posts.
Since the appellant was facing acute shortage of staff, an application was filed in the High Court for vacating the interim order. After considering the grievance made in the application, the Division Bench of the High Court passed an order vacating the aforesaid restraint order. However, before permitting the corporation to make appointments, the Court asked the corporation about the manner and modus operandi, which it would adopt in making these appointments. On the next date of hearing, the administrator of the appellant presented a scheme for recruitment along with the relevant rules. By the impugned order, the High Court approved the scheme subject to various modifications.
DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT:
The Court observed that the impugned order is legally unsustainable inasmuch as it runs contrary to the provisions of the Act applicable to Ranchi Municipal Corporation and the Rules framed thereunder for recruitment of class-III and class-IV employees.
In the writ petition, the Court stated, the respondent had not challenged vires of the Act or the Rules which regulate recruitment in the services of the Municipal Corporation. Therefore, the High Court was not, at all, justified in requiring the appellant to present the scheme regulating the recruitment of class-III and class-IV employees elaborating the procedure and methodology for recruitment against the advertised post and then issue directions for effecting modifications in the scheme.
The appeal was accordingly allowed, the impugned order was set aside.