Prior Assurance and Established Precedent Obligate Employment to Land-Givers Despite Delay and Absence of Specific Samiti Guidelines

The applicant, Puskar Singh Rana, gifted land in 1992 for the establishment of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya (JNV) in District Rudraprayag, based on an assurance by the then Principal that landowners' heirs would be considered for employment when vacancies arose.

In 2016 and 2018, the applicant sought employment for his daughter, Jamwanti Devi, in a Class IV post.

The Principal rejected the claim on December 6, 2018, stating that Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (NVS) regulations lacked provisions for such appointments.

The applicant challenged this rejection, citing U.P. Government notifications from 1980/1981 and a precedent set by the Tribunal in the similar case of Gajendra Singh.

1. Whether the respondents are obligated to provide employment to the ward of a landowner who gifted land for the school based on government notifications and prior assurances

2. Whether the Original Application is barred by the doctrine of laches due to a 27-year delay since the land was gifted

U.P. Government Notifications dated 21.02.1980 and 21.09.1981, which mandate that institutions acquiring land must offer employment to one family member of the affected landowner.

The principle of parity and stare decisis regarding its own earlier decision in Gajendra Singh v. NVS (OA No. 1424/2005), which was upheld by the Uttarakhand High Court in WP (S/B) No. 20/2009, establishing that such landowners have a "reasonable expectation" of employment.

The Tribunal rejected the respondents' argument that NVS regulations supersede state notifications, noting that the school's establishment was predicated on the acquisition of land under the specific promise of employment benefits as per state policy.

Although the respondents argued the case suffered from inordinate delay (27 years), the Tribunal condoned the delay because the legal obligation of NVS had already been settled by the High Court in similar cases, and the applicant's "reasonable expectation" remained valid.

The court determined that since a similarly situated person (Gajendra Singh) was granted relief, the applicant could not be denied the same benefit solely on technical grounds of NVS internal guidelines.

The respondents were directed to consider her for an appropriate vacant post in JNV Rudraprayag or nearby units in U.P./Uttarakhand within eight weeks. The Competent Authority was directed to grant age relaxation as applicable to compassionate appointments. However, the court specified that due to the "peculiar circumstances," this order shall not be cited as a precedent for future cases.