Directive to amend recruitment rules for essential public utility posts vacant for prolonged durations.

The applicant, a Chemist at the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) with a PhD in Chemistry, joined the organization in 1997

He approached the Tribunal seeking a direction for appointment to the post of Director (Treatment Quality Control) [TQC], asserting that he possesses the requisite expertise and that the post has remained vacant on a regular basis since 2008

The applicant alleged that the DJB bypassed regular recruitment through the UPSC, instead assigning "look-after" charges to unqualified officers

The respondents contested the claim, arguing that the applicant was ineligible under the notified Recruitment Rules (RRs), which require five years of regular service in Grade Pay 6600/- or eleven years of combined service in Grade Pay 5400/- and 6600/-

The respondents maintained that the post remained vacant due to a lack of suitable candidates meeting these criteria

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be appointed to the post of Director (TQC) by relaxing the essential qualifications concerning work experience as per the discretionary clauses in the Recruitment Rules

2. Whether the prolonged vacancy of a critical public health post and the continued reliance on ad-hoc "look-after" arrangements are legally sustainable

The Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

It placed primary reliance on Article 21 of the Constitution of India, affirming that the right to clean water is an integral component of the Right to Life

The court also addressed the application of statutory Recruitment Rules (RRs) and the administrative principle that persistent recruitment failures necessitate a review of existing qualification standards to meet organizational and public interests

The Tribunal observed that the post of Director (TQC) is of paramount importance to the citizens of Delhi, as it directly impacts the quality of water supply and public health

It noted with concern that the post had been vacant for 14 years, managed only through "adhocism" and "look-after" charges

While acknowledging that the applicant did not strictly meet the current RRs regarding length of regular service in specific grades, the Tribunal found the resulting administrative impasse unacceptable

The court reasoned that when stringent RRs prevent the filling of a vital post for over a decade, the authorities are obligated to amend or relax those rules to permit qualified and experienced internal candidates to compete

It emphasized that the "due diligence" of the state must ensure that the recruitment process does not jeopardize public welfare due to technical rigidities

The Court directed the Chief Secretary to conduct "due diligence" regarding the amendment or relaxation of the Recruitment Rules for the post of Director (TQC) to facilitate the appointment of a suitable candidate

This exercise must be completed within six months from the receipt of the order

The OA was disposed of with no order as to costs