KAPIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of letter dated 29.04.2016, through which, the petitioner's request for extension in service for another period of one year has been rejected and through which, it has been directed that the petitioner be replaced with a regularly appointed employee by way of deputation.

(2.) After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, the facts, which are borne out from the record of the case and which have emerged from the arguments raised at the bar are that on 24.08.2011, the petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer (Civil) by the Kurukshetra Development Board, Kurukshetra (hereinafter referred to as the Board), on contract basis for six months or till availability of a regular recruit.

(3.) Thereafter, the petitioner was granted extension in service on the same terms and conditions. As per the last extension in service, the petitioner was to serve the respondent Board till 23.02.2016, on the expiry of which, no extension in service was granted to the petitioner. The petitioner made an application for the grant of extension, which was considered and recommended by the respondent Board to the Government, but such recommendation was turned down through the impugned order for reasons, which are not difficult to decipher as the record reveals that on 17.03.2016, the respondent Board had already advertised for filling up the posts in question on regular basis. In the meanwhile, the Government asked the respondent Board not to give extension to the petitioner for another year as requested by him and as an interim measure, appointment of a regularly selected Junior Engineer (Civil) be made by way of deputation, which is a recognized mode of appointment under the applicable Regulations i.e. Kurukshetra Development Board Service Regulations, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations).