S K VERMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the services of an ad hoc public servant can be terminated and another ad hoc employee appointed In his place is the somewhat interesting question, which falls for determination by this Full Bench. This reference has been necessitated in the wake of doubts raised about the correctness of the observations made by the Division Bench at the motion stage in Krishna Devi v. Punjab State (C. W. P. 2268 of 1977 decided on 9-12-1977 (Punj & Her)).

(2.) Though the issue is pristinely legal, yet a passing reference to the facts becomes inevitable. The three petitioners were recruited as Junior Auditors in the office of the District Food & Supplies Controller vide identical letters of appointment (Annexure P. 1). The relevant portion thereof deserves quotation:

(3.) It is the petitioners case that though the temporary post against which they were appointed are yet continuing, nevertheless their services are sought to be terminated and the respondents have sent requisitions to the Employment Exchanges for appointment of fresh candidates in place of the petitioners on ad hoc basis. It is not in dispute that the respondent-State has Issued an order (Annexure P. 2) inter alia providing for the regularisation of certain categories of its ad hoc employees, who had completed at least a minimum period of one year's continuous service on 31-3-1977 and further satisfied the requisite conditions specified in the said order. Admittedly none of the petitioners satisfied the basic conditions spelled out in Annexure P. 2, in order to attract its application. Nevertheless, a challenge is laid to the apprehended termination of the petitioners' services primarily on the ground that their employment cannot be dispensed with as long as the posts against which they were appointed continue and in order to make room for other ad hoc employees.