The Delhi High Court has directed the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) to explain why 91 doctors should not be served copies of a writ petition asking the court to quash their appointments over alleged violation of recruitment rules. The division bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Sanjiv Khanna on Monday sought a reply from AIIMS since it would know addresses and details of the 91 doctors. Petitioner Sarman Singh,now a professor in the Department of Laboratory Medicine of AIIMS,wants the court to quash appointment of 164 assistant professors initially made on an ad hoc basis,allegedly in violation of rules. The petition,filed through advocate Barun Kumar Sinha,also challenged their illegal regularisation and promotion as associate professors. Contending that the entire selection procedure was flawed,Singh claimed that a large number of the appointees did not fulfill eligibility conditions at the time of their ad-hoc appointment between 1995 and 2000 but the management,in the name of staff shortage,selected people and then regularised the appointments. The petitioner also highlighted that though the plea of these ad hoc doctors for regularisation was dismissed by the High Court in 2001,AIIMS went ahead with fresh recruitment in 2003 and gave the ad-hoc professors regular jobs. The petitioner urged the court to order an inquiry into the appointments and fix the responsibility of the errant members of the governing body and the institute. The case witnessed a twist in 2004 when the High Court dismissed Singhs petition on technical grounds. But in 2007,the Supreme Court held that prima facie there were irregularities in the appointments and promotions of these 164 assistant professors and directed the High Court to examine the matter afresh as a PIL. The AIIMS is ailing,it needs a cure, the apex court had then remarked. Subsequently,the Central government,in its affidavit in June 2008,accepted irregularities in promotion of 64 assistant professors as associate professors within a month of their appointment in 2003. The AIIMS also stated that out of 150 doctors appointed on ad hoc basis,115 were regularised between 2002 and 2003. After the matter was reverted to the High Court,the bench decided to also hear the doctors whose services were going to be affected by the court order. But the petitioner did not know the names and whereabouts of 164 doctors. Hence,91 doctors who had moved court in 2001 for regularizing their jobs were named as respondents.
