HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LTD. AND ORS. versus DR. P. SAMASIVA RAO ETC.

Citation: [1996] 1 S.C.R. 1037 · Decided: 30-01-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.C. AGRAWAL, G.T. NANAVATI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LTD. AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
DR. P. SAMASIVA RAO ETC. 
JANUARY 30, 1996 
__,. 
[S.C. AGARWAL AND G.T. NANA VAT!, JJ.]" 
B 
Service Law-Ad hoc appointments-Regularisation-Recruitment 
rules-Procedure prescribed-Regular appoilltment on post of medical of-
~ 
ficer-Method of selection by Selection Committe~Direction for regularisa-
tion given by High Court held impennissible. 
c 
The respondents were appointed as medical officers in the appellant 
corporation on ad hoc basis. They claimed regularisation of their services 
from the initial date of appointment and also sought a direction to the 
appellant· corporation to pay salary and allowances on par with the 
D 
regular medical officers working in the corporation. The Division Bench 
• 
while allowing the writ petitions observed that these persons were eligible 
for appointment and they were also qualified according to the rules and 
there was no complaint abont the satisfactory nature of the service and 
therefore, it was directed that their services be regularised w.e.f. 1.4.1986 
... 
in a regular scale of pay with two advance increments in view of the long E 
spell of temporary service. It was further held that these medical officers 
were not entitled to any other benefits like seniority, promotions etc. These 
appeals had been tiled against the judgment of the High Court. 
The appellant - corporation submitted that regular appointment on 
the post of Medical Officer could only be made through a process of F 
selection by the Selection Committee in accordance with the Recruitment 
Rules framed by the appellant· corporation for appointment and the High 
Court was in error in directing regularisation of all the three medical 
officers w.e.f. 1.4.1986 without their being required to undergo selection by 
the Selection Committee. 
G 
' 
The respondent urged that having regard to the fact that they had 
-l 
been working as medical ofticers for a number of years and there being no 
complaint about their performance during this period and that after 1984 
no regular selection had been made and.the respondent-medical officers 
had no opportunity of being considered for regular selection by the Selec· H 
1037 
1038 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1996] 1 S.C.R. 
A tion Committee, the High Court had not committed any error in giving the 
direction regarding regularisation and for payment of regular salary. 
Allowed the appeals, this Court 
HELD : The process of regularisation involves regular appointment 
B which can be done only in accordance with the prescribed procedure. 
Having regard to the Recruitment Rules which have been made by the 
appellant - corporation, regular appointment on the post of medical ollicer 
could only be made after the duly constituted Selection Committee had 
found the person suitable for such appointment. The fact that no regular 
C selection had been made after their appointment on ad hoc basis did not 
mean that they were entitled to be regularised w.e.f., 1.4.1986. As a result 
of the direction for regularisation given by the High Court, the require-
ment in the Rules regarding selection by a Selection Committee for the 
·purpose of regular appointment on the post of medical ollicer had been 
dispensed with. This was impermissible. The only direction that could be 
D given in the matter of regularisation was that the respondent-medical 
ollicers should be considered by a duly constituted Selection Committee 
as per the Rules for the purpose of regular appointment on the post of 
medical ollicer and the appellant- Corporation should constitute a Selec-
tion Committee for that purpose. (1044-C-G, 1045-C) 
E 
F 
Dr. A.K Jain & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (1987) Supp. SCC 497, 
distinguished. 
Dr. MA. Haque & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., (1993] 2 SCC 213, 
relied on. 
1.2. The direction given by the High Court for payment of regular 
pay scales to the respondent-medical officers w.e.f. 1.4.1986 is sustained. 
(1045-D) 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 4216-19 
G of 1993 ETC. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.2.93 of the Andhra Pradesh 
High Court in W.A. Nos. 281/86, 944/91 and W.P. Nos. 4337 and 585 of 
1989. 
H 
K. Ram Kumar for the Appellants. 
HINDUSTAN SHIPYARD LTD. v. P.S.RAO [S.CAGRAWAL,J.] 
1039 
C K Sucharita, L Nateshwara Rao, R. Santhanakrishnan, K.R. A 
-j 
Nagaraja, Narasimha, P.S. and V.G. Pragasam for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
S.C. AGRAWAL, J. These appeals raise comm

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.