IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 21079 of 2002 Between: V. Gopalam, S/o Late Sri Perraju, National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500040. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman, Executive Council, NIRD and Secretary (Rural Development), Government of India, Krishibhavan, New Delhi-110001. 2 The Director General, National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Rajendranagar,Hyderabad-500 030. 3 The Registrar, National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad - 500 030. 4 Shri P. Pandu Ranga Rao, s/o Not known, National institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the office order No. 114 dt 6-5-2002 and No. 383 dt. 13-8-2002 engaging officer on Special Duty (Legal) in the Institute as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and also in violation of principles of natural justice, equity and transparency expected in respect of appointments and consequently set aside the irregular and illegal appointment of the fourth respondent as Officer on Special Duty (Legal) and direct to recover the amounts incurred due to the said irregular and illegal engagement and award costs. Counsel for the Petitioner: PARTY-IN-PERSON Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.L.RAVICHANDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 21117 of 2002 Between: V. Gopalam, S/o. Late Sri Perraju, National Institute of Rural, Development (NIRD), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500030. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman, Executive Council, NIRD and Secretary (Rural Development), Government of India, Krishibhavan, New Delhi-110 001. 2 The Director General, National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500 030. 3 The Registrar, National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. 4 Col. Babu Thomas (Retd), Presently Working as Camp Officer, National Institute of Rural Development(NIRD), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500 030. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Office order No. 625 dt 8-2-2002 read with office order NO. 126 dt 9- 5-2002 appointing the fourth respondent as camp Officer in the Institute as arbitrary, illegal unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and also in violation of principles of natural justice, equity and transparency expected in respect of appointments and consequently set aside the irregular and illegal appointment of the fourth respondent as Camp Officer and direct to recover the amounts and award costs. Counsel for the Petitioner : PARTY-IN-PERSON Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.L.RAVICHANDER The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 21079 of 2002 & WRIT PETITION NO:21117 of 2002 COMMON ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents in both the Writ Petitions. These two Writ Petitions have been filed questioning the orders of appointment issued to the respondent No.4 in both the writ petitions, appointing them as Officers on Special Duty and as camp officers on temporary basis. Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by a common order. According to the case of the petitioner, the post of Assistant Registrar is a regularly recruited post and during the year 1989, he was functioning as Assistant Registrar in National Institute of Rural Development (NIRD) and (a) Supervision of Vehicles Deployment, (b) Supervision of sanitary arrangements and (c) supervision of hostel management are under the control of Assistant Registrar and while so, the 2nd respondent appointed the respondent No.4 in both the writ petitions as Officer on special duty and now the control over the above sections has been shifted to the newly appointed officers. Questioning the same, these two Writ Petitions have been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent who is functioning as Director of the institution, has no jurisdiction to appoint the respondent No:4 in the respective writ petitions, and the said act has resulted in financial loss to the institution and therefore, such an appointment is illegal. On behalf of the 2nd respondent, counter has been filed contending that the 2nd respondent is the compentent authority to appoint the respondent No:4 as officers on special duty in both the writ petitions in view of the exigency in the course of administration and therefore, the action of the 2nd respondent is sustainable. In both the writ petitions, the respondent No:4 have been taken on a contract basis in view of the existency. At this stage of the proceedings, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that R-4 in both the writ petitions, are not in service and therefore, nothing survives in these writ petitions. Apart from that, the appointment of the respondent No:4 in both the writ petitions, is purely on a contract basis in view of the exigency in the course of the administration and as such, it cannot be said that the 2nd respondent has no jurisdiction to appoint them. However, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents that the respondent No:4 in both the writ petitions, are not in service, I feel that no further orders need be passed in these two Writ Petitions. Accordingly, the two Writ Petitions are closed. ________________________ Justice G.CHANDRAIAH Dated 6th November, 2008. Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.Nos.21079 of 2002 & 21117 of 2002 Dated 6th November, 2008