SURINDRA KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BASED upon the identical and common questions of law and facts, These petitions are disposed of by this common judgment. The issue relates to counting of ad hoc service for the purpose of determination of seniority in the service.

(2.) THE petitioners in all these writ petitions were initially engaged on ad hoc basis having been sponsored by the Employment Exchange and on being selected by a Committee of officers constituted for the purpose of making selection. The petitioners continued to work on ad hoc basis as Lecturers in different subjects spreading over a period of six to ten years and in some cases upto 12 years. Their services were later on regularized by the Government. The petitioners are claiming seniority by counting their ad hoc service towards total length of service rendered by them. Representation of one of the writ petitioners,namely, Sajjan Singh has been rejected vide order dated 24.5.2006 (Annexure P -10 impugned in CWP No.8604 of 2007). The facts are being noticed from CWPNo.8604 of 2007. The petitioners in this case were registered with the Employment Exchanges. Posts of lecturers in different subjects were advertised for making ad hoc appointment. It is alleged that the State also requisitioned the candidates from the different Employment Exchanges. It is further stated that a Selection Committee comprising of DPI (Colleges), an IAS Officer, a subject expert and the Deputy Director (Colleges), Haryana was constituted. The Committee interviewed the candidates and the petitioners were selected as Lecturers in different subjects. It is stated that the petitioners were duly qualified and eligible as per the qualifications prescribed under the recruitment rules. The appointment of the petitioners was made on ad hoc basis. The orders of appointment of some of the petitioners are placed on record as Annexure P -1 (Colly. In CWP No.8604 of 2007). From the appointment order dated 21.9.1979, it appears that the three candidates were appointed as Lecturers (College Cadre) purely on ad hoc basis in the grade of 700/1600 against vacant posts in Government Colleges, Narnaul and Rohtak, respectively. One of the conditions of appointment was that their service can be terminated at any time without assigning any reason. The candidates were asked to join. It is stated that some of the appointees continued from 1976 to 1988 and thereafter their services were regularized through Haryana Public Service Commission. The petitioners have also placed on record two regularization orders (Annexures P -2/1 and P -2/2). From the perusal of these orders, it appears that appointments have been made on the recommendation of Haryana Public Service Commission. It is stipulated that the posts are temporary, but likely to continue. The appointees were placed on probation of two years in the first instance. The confirmation is subject to availability of posts and seniority and service record. In respect of the seniority, following condition was imposed: -

(3.) IT is contended on behalf of the petitioners that even under the aforesaid guidelines of the UGC, the petitioners are entitled to benefit of their past service rendered on ad hoc basis for grant of senior scale and selection grade. As a matter of fact, the petitioners were granted senior scale and selection grade by counting their ad hoc service. One of the petitioners, namely, Sajjan Singh, Lecturer made a representation dated 23.8.2005 (AnnexureP -9) which has been rejected vide order dated 24.5.2006 (AnnexureP -10). It is also the case of the petitioners that some of the employees who were working in private college taken by the Government have been granted the benefit of ad hoc service rendered and reference is made to one Sh. R.K.Arora.