Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the Delhi Transport Corporation's (DTC) failure to appoint Sandeep Kaushik as a driver despite a High Court order. The DTC challenged the High Court's decision, arguing that the recruitment process was flawed and that circumstances had changed since the initial requisition for drivers in 2007. The DTC contended that no driver positions were available, and all appointments were now contractual. The original writ petitioner, Sandeep Kaushik, argued that he had been fighting for his appointment since 2008 and that the High Court had rightly identified the recruitment process as defective. The Supreme Court, while agreeing with the High Court's assessment of the recruitment process, recognized the practical difficulties in appointing Kaushik after 14 years, given his age and the requirement to pass a driving test. The Court concluded that awarding a lumpsum compensation of Rs. 7.5 lakhs with interest was a more appropriate remedy than reinstatement. The DTC was directed to pay this amount within eight weeks, with the option to recover it from the recruitment agency. The Court did not impose costs on either party.
Headnote
A) Employment Law - Recruitment Process - Validity of Recruitment - Delhi Transport Corporation Act, 1950 - The High Court found the recruitment process flawed as appointments were based solely on viva test marks. The Supreme Court upheld this finding but noted changed circumstances made actual appointment impossible, directing compensation instead. Held that compensation serves substantial justice (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent should be appointed as a driver after a delay of 14 years and changed circumstances.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court modified the High Court's order, awarding Rs. 7.5 lakhs as compensation with interest instead of actual appointment, to be paid within eight weeks.
Law Points
- Writ jurisdiction
- Recruitment process
- Compensation in lieu of appointment
- Contractual employment
- Age limit for drivers
