The HC has set aside the termination of sanitary inspectors in Nagercoil on the basis that their names were not listed by the employment exchange, nearly two years after appointing them, though they were offered a one-time relaxation to do a course in an institute out of Tamil Nadu.
“If the requirement of getting the names of petitioners sponsored through Employment Exchange is insisted, at the relevant point of time, their names would have been sponsored,” the judge said.
As per the case, the petitioners who were fully eligible for appointment to the post of Health Inspector Grade-II, were not originally sponsored by the Employment Exchange on the ground, that they had acquired Diploma in Sanitary Inspector at All India Institute of Local Self Government Institution, Bombay, which is outside TN.
Based on this, the petitioners and similarly placed persons, appealed to the Government, which in turn issued a GO, relaxing the rules as a one-time measure and appointed them. Accordingly, on Jan 13, 2011, the petitioners were appointed as Health Inspector Grade-II
Two years later, the DD, Health Service, Nagercoil, issued a show cause notice, as to why their services should not be terminated, since they had not been sponsored through Employment Exchange. Following this, the DD of Health Service, Kanniyakumari, terminated the services of the petitioners. Challenging the order of termination and the consequential relieving order, the petitioners moved the writ petition.
Based on this, Justice Sundar in his order also held, “In such circumstances, it is too late for the DD, Health Service, Nagercoil, to contend that the names of petitioners were not sponsored through Employment Exchange. It is not open to the said authority to terminate services of the petitioners by referring to the irregularity in the selection, after this length of time.”
“The position that the petitioners’ names have been registered with the District Employment Exchange, is neither denied nor disputed. Mere non-observance may not be a vital aspect to revoke appointment, having regard to the factual circumstances and events pointed out,” the judge added.