Umesh Chandra Gaur v. Union of India & Ors.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, who claims to be an applicant to the post of Director in the respondent No.2/Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti, praying inter alia for quashing the order dated 12.9.2014, whereunder the tenure of the respondent No.3 as Director of the respondent No.2/Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti was extended by three months. The petitioner further seeks directions to the respondent No.1/Ministry of Culture, UOI and the respondent No.2/Samiti not to further extend the tenure of the respondent No.3 to the aforesaid post. Lastly, the petitioner seeks directions to the respondent No.1/UOI and the respondent No.2/Samiti to expedite the process of filling up the vacancy of 2014:DHC:7040 Director in the respondent No.2/Samiti, pursuant to the advertisement dated 17.5.2014.

2. On the last date of hearing, none was present for the respondent No.2/Samiti and as a result, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 was directed to convey the next date of hearing in the present case to the respondent No.2/Samiti. Pursuant thereto, learned counsel enters appearance for both the respondents No.2 & 3.

3. Counsels for the respondents jointly oppose the maintainability of this petition and state that the petitioner does not have any locus standi to challenge the order dated 12.9.2014, whereunder the tenure of the respondent No.3 as Director of the respondent No.2/Samiti was extended for a period of three months, for the reason that he is not an employee of the respondent No.2/Samiti, but only an aspirant to the post of Director.

4. As for the last relief prayed for by the petitioner for filling up the vacancy to the post of Director in the respondent No.2/Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti pursuant to the advertisement dated 17.5.2014, it is submitted by Ms. Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondent No.1/UOI that the matter is under the active consideration of the Prime Minister’s Office, who is empowered to appoint the Vice Chairman of the respondent No.2/Samiti and only upon his appointment, can the Director’s appointment be finalized. It is submitted that the matter of nomination of the Vice Chairman is likely to be finalized in a month and immediately thereafter, the appointment to the post of Director in the respondent No.2/Samiti shall be taken up. The documents handed over by learned counsel for the respondent No.1/UOI are taken on record, with a copy to the other side.

5. In view of the aforesaid submission made by the counsel for the respondent No.1/UOI, the present petition is disposed of, by binding the respondent No.1/UOI to the assurance given to the effect that nomination of a person to the post of the Vice Chairman of the respondent No.2/Samiti shall be finalized by 15.1.2015, and the formalities in that regard shall be completed by the end of January,

2015. It is directed that immediately thereafter, the process of making an appointment to the post of Director in respondent No.2/ Samiti shall be taken up and finalized as expeditiously as is possible.

6. Needless to state that if the grievance of the petitioner still survives, he shall be entitled to seek his legal remedies in accordance with law.

7. The writ petition is disposed of. File be consigned to the record room. (HIMA KOHLI) DECEMBER 15, 2014/sk JUDGE