The Orissa High Court has delivered a significant judgment that strongly criticizes the practice of contractual appointments made outside the established recruitment framework, dismissing a writ appeal concerning the appointment of an assistant professor in anaesthesiology at MKCG Medical College and Hospital in Berhampur. The court emphasized that such contractual engagements lack legal sanctity when they bypass regular recruitment processes mandated by law.
Court Questions Contractual Hiring Practices
A division bench comprising Justices Dixit Krishna Shripad and Chittaranjan Dash, in their ruling dated January 28, pointed out that the existing recruitment rules do not provide for contractual engagement. The bench expressed its inability to comprehend why state authorities resorted to contractual hiring without initiating the regular recruitment process as ordained by law. This observation came during the hearing of an appeal filed by Shiwangi Mahato, who challenged a November 11, 2024 order from a single judge that had dismissed her objection to an advertisement issued on November 5 by the MKCG principal for filling the post on a contractual basis.
Background of the Legal Dispute
Mahato had claimed that she was previously selected following an advertisement dated May 8, 2024, but her appointment was hindered due to an interim order passed by the High Court on May 20 of that year. This interim order was issued in response to a petition filed by Rakesh Kumar Ludam, who contested the May 8 advertisement on the grounds that it was issued while he was serving as an assistant professor on a contractual basis. The bench clarified that the quashing of the contractual advertisement did not grant any "indefeasible right of appointment" to candidates selected through a process not recognized by law.
Court's Strong Criticism and Broader Implications
In endorsing the single judge's order, the bench quoted Oscar Wilde, noting that "there is scope for improvement even in heaven," highlighting the need for better practices in recruitment. The court rejected Mahato's claim, stating that a "cryptic advertisement for contractual appointment followed by a half-hearted walk-in interview conducted by persons not answering the description of selection committee under the extant rules, would not give a legally enforceable right to appointment to anyone, be it contractual or otherwise."
The bench further expressed concern over witnessing a "plethora of such cases" and harshly deprecated the practice of contractual appointments in public employment that violate recruitment norms. It warned that walk-in interviews could lead to allegations of shrouded mystery, shaking public confidence in the recruitment process, and should only be adopted if permitted by rules, which was not the case here.
Broader Governance Issues Highlighted
The court also addressed the wider problem of long-pending vacancies in government posts, cautioning that irregular and infrequent recruitment processes render many eligible candidates age-barred and negatively impact governance. In dismissing the appeal, the bench directed the registry to forward copies of the judgment to the chief secretary and the secretary of the Odisha Public Service Commission (OPSC) for necessary action, underscoring the need for adherence to legal recruitment frameworks to ensure transparency and fairness in public employment.
