STATE OF HARYANA Vs. MRS. KIRAN VASHISHT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy here is with regard to adhoc service being taken into account for purposes of seniority. In other words, determining seniority on the basis of continuous length of service, is the relevant dated that on which the adhoc or temporary appointment was made or that of regular appointment to the post.

(2.) The point in issue arises in the context of the determination of the seniority of Kiran Vashisht, who was appointed as a temporary Clerk in the office of the Labour Commissioner, Haryana on April 1, 1967. Later, after passing the requisite test held by the Haryana Subordinate Services Selection Board, her services as such were regularised on Sept. 8, 1971. In this test, the other private respondents also took party. They joined service after Kiran Vashisht but as they had been placed higher in merit in the list prepared by the Selection Committee, they were shown senior to Kiran Vashisht. This is what led her to move this Court in writ proceedings to impugn the seniority of those respondents over her.

(3.) Relying upon the instructions of March 29, 1957 (Annexure R-1) the stand of the State of Haryana was that temporary service rendered by an employee could not be taken into account for purposes of seniority and, therefore, the service rendered by Kiran Vashish( till Sept. 8, 1971, could not count towards her seniority.