DINESH KUMAR Vs. NETAJI SUBHASH INSTITUTE OF TEC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue Rule. With consent of counsel for the parties, these petitions were heard finally.

(2.) All the Petitioners in these cases were appointed/engaged by the Respondent, Netaji Subhash Institute of Technology (hereafter ?the Institute?). The initial appointment or engagement differ; in some cases, appointments were made in 1991-92, 1995-96 and subsequently in 1998-99. All the Petitioners continued to work either as contract employees or on ad hoc basis. In many cases the periods of employment were not continuous but on intermittent basis.

(3.) The Institute needed the services of the Petitioners, for putting up a building and most of the Petitioners were engaged in connection with the building project. It is an undisputed fact that regular sanctioned vacancies in respect of these posts were not created by the Institute, which is an autonomous organization, but subject to the control of the Government of NCT.