CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has dismissed a writ appeal filed by one Shiwangi Mahato challenging the rejection of her claim for appointment as assistant professor (anaesthesiology) at MKCG Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur, while strongly deprecating the practice of contractual appointments in public employment made beyond the regular recruitment rules.
A division bench comprising Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad and Justice Chittaranjan Dash directed the Registry to send copies of the judgement to the chief secretary of Odisha and the secretary of the Odisha Public Service Commission, urging swift action in undertaking regular recruitment.
The bench upheld the November 11, 2024 order of a Single Judge that had dismissed Mahato’s petition against an advertisement dated November 5, 2024, issued by the principal of MKCG Medical College for filling up the post on contractual basis.
Mahato had contended that she was earlier selected pursuant to an advertisement dated May 8, 2024. She was, however, denied appointment due to an interim order passed by the high court on May 20, 2024, in a petition filed by Rakesh Kumar Ludam. Ludam had challenged the May 8 advertisement on the ground that it was issued while he was serving as an assistant professor on contractual basis.
Rejecting Mahato’s plea, the court expressed concern over state agencies resorting to contractual appointments without initiating regular recruitment.
“It is not disputed before us that the extant rules of recruitment do not provide for contractual engagement. We fail to understand how the state agency could go for contractual appointment without exploring the regular recruitment process ordained by law.”
The bench deprecated the practice of contractual appointments in public employment undertaken in violation of established recruitment norms and observed that walk-in interview gives scope for allegations of misuse, which ultimately shakes confidence in the recruitment process. Such a mode could be adopted only if permitted by rules, which was not the case here, the bench stated.
The bench clarified that quashing of the contractual advertisement did not confer any indefeasible right of appointment on candidates selected through a mode unknown to recruitment rules. The court also highlighted the adverse impact of prolonged vacancies, warning that irregular recruitment leads to eligible candidates becoming age-barred and affects governance.