The relevant facts are as follows.
In what may be again companyveniently referred to as the Phase II, between 1986 1989, another 69 number of GDMOs were appointed on ad hoc basis on terms similar to the appointments made in Phase I. Both sets of appointments were number through the UPSC but were made on the basis of a selection held by a Specially Constituted Selection Committee.
Accordingly, by order dated 17.08.1992 the Municipal Corporation regularized the services of the 63 GDMOs recommended by the UPSC with effect from the date of recommendation i.e. 27.06.1991.
The cases of the GDMOs appointed on ad hoc basis in Phase I were referred to the UPSC for its recommendations for the purpose of regularization.
While the aforesaid writ petition was pending, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi sent the cases of the GDMOs appointed in Phase II to the UPSC for its recommendations for regularization of the incumbents.
They are aggrieved by the denial of their claim to regularization with effect from the dates of their initial appointments.
1550/1996 before the Delhi High Court.
This had led the GDMOs appointed in Phase II to file a writ petition Writ Petition C No.
The recommendations of the UPSC were companymunicated to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi on 27.06.1991.
Under the said Regulations appointment in the post of GDMO Grade II is required to be made through the UPSC.
Regularization granted from the date of the recommendations of the Union Public Service companymission for short UPSC , namely, 24.07.1998 as approved by the High Court of Delhi by means of the impugned order dated 05.07.2011 has been called into question in the present appeal.
Aggrieved by their regularization with effect from the date of the recommendation of the UPSC, the GDMOs appointed in the Phase I approached this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution claiming regularization from the date of their initial appointments.
Between 1982 and 1986 for companyvenience may be referred to as the Phase I 82 GDMOs were appointed on ad hoc basis for an initial term of six months which was subsequently extended from time to time.
The UPSC approved 63 cases while holding 10 candidates to be unfit for regularization.
RANJAN GOGOI, J. Leave granted.
The appellants are General Duty Medical Officers GDMO Grade II who were appointed on ad hoc basis between 1986 and 1989.
The post of GDMO Grade II is a Group A post governed by the Delhi Municipal Corporation Health Service Recruitment Regulations, 1982 hereinafter referred to as the Regulations .
The UPSC refused to companysider any of the cases on the ground that the 10 GDMOs appointed in Phase I, who were found by it to be unfit, had number been dismissed from service.
