DHIENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:-

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that petitioner No.1 was appointed as Assistant Professor (Political Science) in Government College Sarkaghat w.e.f. 9/3/2015 on PTA basis and petitioner No.2 was appointed as Lecturer (Physical Education) r in Government College Sarkaghat w.e.f. 7/8/2009. Though the services of petitioner No.2 were terminated on account of the joining of a regular hand in the month of March, 2010, however, in the month of April 2011, he was re-engaged and he continues to serve as such. According to the petitioners, in terms of notification dtd. 26/7/2014 (Annexure P-6) all incumbents appointed on PTA basis prior to issuance of the said notification have been allowed to continue in service, with the condition that, inconsonance with the UGC guidelines, candidates who acquired M.Phil Degree before 11/6/2009, are not even required to pass NET/SET. According to the petitioners, they are being paid by the PTA, out of the funds being generated by the PTA, and meager salary is being paid to them despite the fact that they are performing same and similar duties as are being performed by regularly appointed teacher/lecture. According to the petitioners, they possess requisite qualification for being appointed against the posts manned by them and, in these circumstances, the petition stands filed with the prayer that respondents be directed to extend the benefit of PTA Grant-in-Aid Rules to the petitioners from the initial date of their appointment with interest.

(3.) The stand of the State is that the Government of Himachal Pradesh has notified Grant-in-Aid Rules to Parent Teacher Association. Petitioners were never engaged in terms of the said policy and in terms of the information gathered by the respondents; both the petitioners were engaged purely on local PTA fund collected mostly from the parents of students for effective teaching only excluding the vacation. The petitioners were verbally engaged by the PTA Executive Committee.