LAXMAN TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner had filed Original Application No. 1445/1992 seeking seniority from the date of his initial appointment on ad hoc basis before the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal. On abolition of the Tribunal the matter reached to this Court for adjudication.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed on ad hoc basis as 'Vaidya' Grade -l for a period of six months or till the candidates selected by the Public Service Commission are posted, whichever is earlier by order dated 17.1.1976. Pursuant to the M.P. Regularisation of Ad -hoc Appointment Rules, 1986 (for short 'Regularisation Rules') the respondents appointed him on the post of Ayurved Medical Officer for a period of two years with a condition that he will be treated as regular employee from the date of regularization and will be kept below the persons who are selected pursuant to the recruitment rules.

(3.) THE respondents filed their return. They contend that the petitioner's services have been regularized by order dated 29.4.1987 under the provisions of Regularisation Rules. In the appointment order itself it was mentioned that the petitioner shall be assigned seniority below those employees who were appointed in accordance with the recruitment rules. They placed reliance on Rule 12 of the Regularization Rules which provides that the seniority of an ad -hoc employee whose services have been regularized under the Regularization Rules shall be counted from the date of regularization. They stated that the petitioner was appointed in 1976 on ad -hoc basis. His appointment was for a period of six months or till regular candidates selected by Public Service Commission are made available. They stated that having regard to the provisions contained in Regularization Rules and having regard to the condition of the appointment order the petitioner cannot claim seniority from the date of his ad hoc appointment.