Read Time: 05 minutes

Delhi High Court today directed the Delhi Government and Institute of Human Behaviour and Allied Sciences (IHBAS) to complete the process of appointment of a new Director of IHBAS before November 30, 2021.

The division bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh was hearing a plea filed by Tej Bahadur Singh challenging the extension of tenure granted to the current IHBAS Director NG Desai after he attained the age of 65 years.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan appearing for the petitioner submitted that the government has been deliberately delaying the process of selection of the Director of IHBAS for the past 11 months under the garb of the pandemic to keep the present Director on post.

The counsel appearing for IHBAS today submitted that the procedure for appointment of an expert committee has begun and the Director will be appointed by November 30.

In view of the said submissions the bench adjourned the matter till November 15 and clarified that the recruitment process should be completed by November 30.

The petitioner who is a former employee of the Institute had submitted that “The Institute is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Act 1860, funded jointly by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India and Government of NCT of Delhi. It is submitted that IHBAS is a prime Hospital and its affairs need to be organised and controlled by the authorised and legally selected and appointed person. The affairs of the Govt. Hospital under the garb of autonomous body, cannot be hood winked and the rules and regulations cannot be thrown to the wind”.

The petitioner argued that “Dr. N.G. Desai Respondent no. 5 who was appointed as a Director in accordance with the recruitment rules, rather it can be said the existing rules, has attained the age of 65 years i.e. the age of superannuation on 18.10.2020, but he is being permitted to control the activities and affairs of the institution even after the said date and is being permitted to work as Director by Respondent no. 3 and 4, with no authority to do so and their action is totally non-est. It is submitted that the existing recruitment rules not prescribe for such extension at all.”

Case Title: Tej Bahadur Singh vs GNCTD