YOMTO LOLLEN Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K. Ete, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. R.H. Nabam, learned Senior Govt. Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh.

(2.) The petitioners, numbering 8 (eight), are serving as District Programme Manager ('DPM' in short) under NRHM, Arunachal Pradesh on contractual basis. An interview was conducted on 11/8/2008 for selection and appointment of District Programme Manager ('DPM' in short). The petitioners appeared in the said interview and were selected and accordingly they were appointed to the aforesaid post vide order dated 18/8/2006. The petitioners were appointed on contract basis under RCH-II Programme on a consolidated monthly pay of Rs. 15,000.00 per month purely on probation till 31/3/2007. Their services would be governed by the terms of reference and the letter of undertaking signed by the staff at the time of appointment. On the expiry of aforesaid period of appointment, the services of the petitioners were extended for another one year i.e. till 30/6/2009. Before 30/6/2009, the petitioners were served with a letter for re-interview for extension of contractual services vide impugned letter dated 10/6/2009.

(3.) Mr. Ete, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no provision for holding re-interview for extension of contractual service inasmuch as they appeared in the interview held earlier and they were selected for appointment to the post of DPMs. For the purpose of extension of service, according to Mr. Ete, the authorities concerned may take into consideration the report of the 'Performance Appraisal Board' prepared on the basis of inputs received from district concerned and if the report is not satisfactory, the competent authority may, at any time, terminate the contractual service by giving one month notice or one month's salary in lieu of notice. This has been provided in the appointment letter itself which reads as follows: