AMRISH CHANANA Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by 16 petitioners. One petitioner, namely, the petitioner No. 5-Dr. Subhash Sahu has resigned and, therefore, the writ petition has to be decided qua the remaining 15 petitioners. Petitioners have been appointed as either Readers or Lecturers or Professors in the respondent No. 2-institute. The petitioners are seeking appropriate writs, orders or directions for quashing of the impugned newspaper advertisement dated 02.02.2013 by which the respondent No. 2-institute/employer/ Chaudhary Brahm Prakash Ayurvedic Charak Sansthan is seeking to call and appoint persons as Readers, Lecturers and Professors to the posts to which the petitioners stand appointed.

(2.) Instead of referring to the contentions and pleadings of the petitioners, let me at the outset refer to the contentions urged on behalf of respondent No.2, inasmuch as, it is that contention which has to be examined with respect to the facts of the case. The contention on behalf of the respondent No. 2 is that the petitioners having taken their appointments with open eyes for a contractual period of one year, consequently, these contractual appointees/petitioners cannot claim to be regularly appointed persons and seek reliefs as prayed for in this writ petition because such reliefs are barred in view of the ratio of Constitutional Bench judgment of Hon?ble Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors Vs. Umadevi & Ors., 2006 4 SCC 1.

(3.) It is argued on behalf of respondent No. 2 in support of the above stated preposition that as there were no sanctioned posts existing when petitioners were appointed on account of the fact that the recruitment rules of the respondent No. 2 were not framed at the time of appointments of the petitioners, and consequently since existence of sanctioned posts were lacking, the appointments of the petitioners cannot be regularized as the regular appointments can only be against sanctioned posts.