Madras HC asks govt to consider perils of overqualified staff
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai:27.03.2019
Observing that appointment of overqualified candidates to entry-level posts such as Grade-II constables is contributing to growing indiscipline and insubordination, as they refuse to do certain ‘menial jobs’ resulting in higher officials unable to function effectively, the Madras high court has suggested the state to consider the issues in detail for prescription of requisite and maximum educational qualification for appointment to such posts.
“Even in high courts, the administration is facing these issues and consequences. Postgraduate degree holders are appointed to the post of sweepers/scavengers and office assistants. After joining, they are refusing to perform certain menial jobs, which are the duties and responsibilities prescribed in the service rules. Conflicting situations are arising. Higher officials are unable to function effectively and efficiently for want of adequate support from these employees.
If the situation continues, the same would affect the public administration and solemn functions as a whole. Thus, a review in this regard is warranted,” Justice S M Subramaniam said.
The judge made the observation while dismissing a plea moved by P Muthu, inspector of police, TSP VII Battalion, seeking to quash a desertion order issued against him by his commandant.
“As far as the present writ petition is concerned, the writ petitioner remained in unauthorized absence for more than 21days and even after the order of desertion, the petitioner has not chosen to report before the competent authority by explaining the reasons for desertion. Contrarily, he has chosen to file the present writ petition,” the judge said. The additional government pleader submitted that in order to circumvent the order of transfer, the writ petitioner remained unauthorizedly absent. The court said, “This being the conduct and attitude of the police working in the rank of inspector, this court is of an opinion that there is no reason to consider his case for quashing of the order on desertion.”
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai:27.03.2019
Observing that appointment of overqualified candidates to entry-level posts such as Grade-II constables is contributing to growing indiscipline and insubordination, as they refuse to do certain ‘menial jobs’ resulting in higher officials unable to function effectively, the Madras high court has suggested the state to consider the issues in detail for prescription of requisite and maximum educational qualification for appointment to such posts.
“Even in high courts, the administration is facing these issues and consequences. Postgraduate degree holders are appointed to the post of sweepers/scavengers and office assistants. After joining, they are refusing to perform certain menial jobs, which are the duties and responsibilities prescribed in the service rules. Conflicting situations are arising. Higher officials are unable to function effectively and efficiently for want of adequate support from these employees.
If the situation continues, the same would affect the public administration and solemn functions as a whole. Thus, a review in this regard is warranted,” Justice S M Subramaniam said.
The judge made the observation while dismissing a plea moved by P Muthu, inspector of police, TSP VII Battalion, seeking to quash a desertion order issued against him by his commandant.
“As far as the present writ petition is concerned, the writ petitioner remained in unauthorized absence for more than 21days and even after the order of desertion, the petitioner has not chosen to report before the competent authority by explaining the reasons for desertion. Contrarily, he has chosen to file the present writ petition,” the judge said. The additional government pleader submitted that in order to circumvent the order of transfer, the writ petitioner remained unauthorizedly absent. The court said, “This being the conduct and attitude of the police working in the rank of inspector, this court is of an opinion that there is no reason to consider his case for quashing of the order on desertion.”
No comments:
Post a Comment