In a scathing rebuke of recruitment irregularities in Puducherry, the Supreme Court has directed the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) to investigate illegal appointments of ad hoc lecturers at a government polytechnic. The court also ordered the immediate regularization of 18 lecturers without Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) involvement, invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan criticized the systemic failures, remarking that out of 51 sanctioned lecturer positions at Motilal Nehru Government Polytechnic College, 45 were filled by ad hoc appointments. The court noted that 15 of these lecturers had previously secured favorable rulings for regularization, but their status remained unresolved due to UPSC’s refusal to approve their appointments.
The case stemmed from three lecturers who sought regularization, arguing that others in similar positions had received the same relief. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) had ruled in their favor, a decision later upheld by the High Court. However, the Union of India and Puducherry’s Directorate of Technical and Higher Education challenged the ruling before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court lambasted UPSC’s defiance of its 2007 order, which mandated a scheme for regularizing casual lecturers. It noted that UPSC had regularized similar appointments in other institutions but refused to do so for these lecturers, calling this stance “audacious.”
Highlighting the prolonged exploitation of ad hoc lecturers, the court cited legal precedents to emphasize that authorities cannot use the State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi (3) ruling to justify years of irregular employment without initiating proper recruitment. Given the reluctance to implement earlier directives, the court exercised its special powers to secure justice for all 18 lecturers.
The ruling also issued a firm directive to the Puducherry government: moving forward, all faculty vacancies at the Polytechnic College must be filled strictly under the 2006 recruitment rules, without any ad hoc arrangements.
Beyond the immediate relief granted, the Supreme Court ordered a full-fledged CVC probe to identify officials responsible—both current and former—for the unauthorized appointments. The commission is expected to submit its findings by May 14, 2025.
“The government is duty-bound to recruit the best talent through a transparent process. The manner in which these ad hoc appointments have persisted even after clear recruitment rules were established demands accountability,” the court stated.
