Greetings to all

I earnestly request all to kindly enlighten with more relevant case law / provisions on the
subject question "Is forwarding of employment applications through proper channel /
submission of NOC at the time of interview in C!"s from C!" employee necessary
when it is not insisted upon rivate !ector employee#"$
%he &ovt$ of India has issued' from time to time' many guidelines to the affect that (
the forwarding of applications should be the rule rather than an exception $
Ordinarily every employee should be permitted to apply for outside post but they should
not be done more than )* times in a year+$ ,urther' prospects of the bright candidates
should not be hampered$ ,orwarding of applications %hrough roper Channel or
submission of NOC at the time of interview is not required for rivate !ector
employment$ ,urther' the &overnment of India had also issued instructions where
applications of a &overnment !ervant for appointment / employment elsewhere
should not be considered or forwarded viz. if he is under suspension, disciplinary
proceeding pending against him or sanction for prosecution had been accorded or
charge sheet had been filed in Criminal Court against him$
,urther' the -ept$ of ublic .nterprises' New -elhi /a Nodal 0gency for C!"s1' had
deleted / cancelled the O2s dated 3453453674 and 3*53453674 dealing with routing of
employment applications vide -.8s O2 No$ 4)/91/695-./&21 dated 3)5345366: at
!l$ Nos$ 47* ; <:* respectively as these guidelines are no longer necessary or
relevant as it is felt that with the passage of time and changing policies and economic
scenario' and the maturity attained by ublic !ector .nterprises$ 0lso' O2s dated 3<5
)=536::' 4<5)953673 and )95)453679' dealing with enforcement / transfer of bond in
respect of employees of ublic .nterprises who leave the services of one "ndertaking
to join another "ndertaking / &ovt$' were deleted vide O2 ibid at !l$ Nos$ 47)' 473 ;
474 respectively$ >owever' subsequently after receiving references from various
quarters' these O2s dealing with enforcement / transfer of bond had been revived with
modifications vide -.?s O2 No$ 39/41/4))<5-./&21/&@59: dated 465):54))* /%he
scanned copies of said O2s are unable to upload as an 0ttachment in this online 1$
%herefore' the O2s which were deleted and not revived are still no more relevant$ ,rom
the above' it can be inferred that forwarding of applications for selection in another
"ndertaking / &ovt$ is necessary only in case of the employee who is under bond and
not otherwise$ 0s observed in practice' each different C!"s are having different set
of rules with regard to forwarding employment applications of their employees to
another C!" / &ovt$ Organisation and not having equality amongst all C!"s$ %his
itself violates equality as envisaged under 0rticles 3* ; 3= of the Constitution of India$
Reproduced in quotes is the text from the Questioner part in LLR uly !""#A
(>on?ble !upreme Court as well as >igh Courts have held in many cases that
rights of an employee to seek and search better employment are not to be
curbed even on the ground that he or she has got some training or even
confidential data of the employer$ In a recent case of 0merican .Bpress Cank
@td$ vs$ 2s$ riya uri' 4))= @@D =7<' the -elhi >igh Court has held that
freedom of changing employment for improving service conditions is a vital and
important right of an employee which cannot be restricted or curtailed even on
the ground that he or she has possessed the employer?s data and confidential
information since such a restraint will facilitate the employer to create a situation
such as Eonce a customer of 0merican .Bpress /Cank1 always a customer of
0merican .Bpress /Cank1? which will be violative of the rights of the employee$
%herefore' the condition imposed by us in the promotion policy for not counting
the minimum qualifying period on account of applying for outside employment
shall be definitely violative of the rights of the employee before the eyes of @aw$
2ore over' &ovt$ of India has also emphasiFed through its various 0dministrative
Instructions regarding the importance of forwarding the applications of
employees for outside employment for their career advancement and the same is
to be followed as a matter of rule eBcept in cases where they can be with held in
public interest$ 2ore over' ublic interest is also to be interpreted strictly$+
%his issue was also answered by >on8ble >igh Court of unjab ; >aryana vide its
judgment dated 445)<53674 at para 7 in CG No$<64 of 3674 cited in the case of -r$
/2iss1 !ubhash Haushal v$ !tate of unjab ; others II 5 @@I 3674 page 439$ 0s per the
judgment supra' production of "No Objection Certificate" was insisted to the candidates
who are in service of one / the unjab1 &ovt$ when the same was not insisted to the
other candidates who may either be in service of any other &ovt$ / !emi5&ovt$ /
0uthority or may not be in service at all$ It was held supra' that the operation of these
instructions /imposing such conditions1 is likely to do injustice to the candidates who are
in the service of the &ovt$ %hereby offending 0rticles 3* and 3= of the Constitution of
India$ %his is in fact a judgment in rem having universal application in general and not
restricted to parties alone$
Non5forwarding such employment application or non5issue of NOC or imposing such
conditions of forwarding applications %hrough proper Channel on employees of C!"
may also amount to violation of >uman Dights as it is affecting the Dights relating to
@ife' @iberty' .quality and -ignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution as per
the provisions under !ection 4/31/d1 of the rotection of >uman Dights 0ct' 366<$
Imposing such conditions is also causing a perennial mental agony in the minds of
C!" employees$ Non5forwarding of applications may be treated violation of 0rticle 43
and also 0rticle 4< by treating such acts as ,orced @abour on the reason that such acts
are inhibiting mobility of &ovt$ .mployees amongst &ovt$ -epts$ / !"s$ In fact'
,undamental Dights cannot even be waived by any individual$
,urther' terms of employment in C!"s are governed by the provisions of the Contract
0ct and such instructions are against ublic olicy$ In case of selection' the C!"
employee has to resign the present post before joining another C!" even after his /
her application is forwarded through proper channel$ "nlike in &overnment
-e)6partments' there is no Right to Lien in C!"s even after such applications are
forwarded %hrough roper Channel$ 2ere forwarding of employment applications by the
present employer ipso facto does not guarantee selection in another Organisation$
Ghatever the formalities are carried out to rivate !ector employee after their selection
can be done to the ublic !ector employee by the new employer in case his application
is not forwarded %hrough roper Channel or NOC was not issued$
-espite very clear case laws' Constitutional / >uman Dights provisions and knowing
fully well that 0dministrative Instructions cannot take away !tatutory Dights' all most all
the C!"s are least bothered while issuing employment notifications imposing
unwarranted conditions' who in fact requires human approach and legal education$
%he following issues are needed to be answeredA
3$ Ghether imposing such conditions on employees of C!"s are still necessary /
warranted in the present era of &lobalisation' @iberalisation ; rivatisation specially
when security of employment is not guaranteed in !"s #$
4$ Ghether prospects of bright candidates on open selection should invariably depend
on forwarding of applications by the present employer to another "ndertaking / &ovt$
Organisation#
!ocial minded legal practitioners may like to take up such "C@IC issues through I@$