SAVITA RANI Vs. STATE OF J AND K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been appointed as Junior Assistant for a period of 60 days against the post of Junior Stenographer by the District Development Commissioner, Rajouri, vide Order No. PS/94-95/4159-61 dated September 15, 1994. This arrangement has been continued vide orders dated November 17, 1994, May 18, 1995 and August 16, 1995 for a period of 89 days each or till the incumbent is posted by the competent Authority against the post of Junior Scale Stenographer.

(2.) The respondents have filed the objections stating therein that the appointment of the petitioner for a period of 89 days or till the incumbent is posted by the competent authority was ad hoc appointment which does not vest any right in the petitioner to seek regularisation. The petitioner has not attended the office after February 4, 1997. The petitioner after February 4, 1997 neither was holding any post nor any order for extension of ad hoc period was passed. An ad hocee (sic) has no right to hold the office after the expiry of the period of ad hoc appointment. The appointment of the petitioner as Junior Assistant is admittedly without any post. Appointment without post is no appointment. It is an abuse of power as pronounced by the Supreme Court in Himachal Road Transport Corporation v. Dinesh Kumar, AIR 1996 SC 2226 : 1996 (4) SCC 560 : 1996-II-LLJ-760 holding at p. 762 of LLJ:

(3.) The appointment of the petitioner is illegal, without jurisdiction and sheer abuse of power.