Ad-hoc appointments made for a fixed period or till a new incumbent joins, whichever is earlier, cannot be regularised.

This writ petition on behalf of four petitioners has been tiled for regularisation of their services on the posts of SUPW - teacher, TGT Math. teacher, TGT Sanskrit teacher and Drawing teacher respectively. All of them were appointed for a period of 179 days or till a regular incumbent to the post joins, whichever is earlier. Petitioner no. 1 was appointed on 12.11.92, while the other three petitioners were appointed on 18.8.92. The posts were advertised through the local employment exchange. The petitioners applied and were called for interview under letters dated 25.7.92. After interview, they were appointed on ad hoc basis in the manner stated above.

2. It is not in dispute that the rules governing Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan envisage different types of appointment including regular, ad hoc and part-time (contractual). According to respondents, regular appointments arc made by the Assistant Com missioners of the Regions on the basis of All India Advertisement. This is admitted in paragraph 15 of the writ petition. According to respondents further, unlined vacancies, due to non-availability of the regular appointees, are filled up by making appointments either on ad hoc basis or on part time (contractual) basis to meet the needs of the students by way of local arrangement at the school level. The ad hoc appointments arc made by inviting names from the local employment exchange and selecting the candidates on the basis of interview. This is one to ensure that the students do not suffer for 'want of teachers. Ad hoc appointments and part time (contractual)' appointments, however, are terminable on fulfilling certain condition such as, in the case of ad hoc appointments it is not .to exceed a period of 179 days or is terminable at the end of the academic session or till the regular incumbent joins; and in the case of part-time (contractual) appointments; the same is terminable at any time without assigning any reason after giving notice.

3. In the instant case advertisement was made and persons were. called for interview making it clear that they should participate in the interview only if they arc interested to serve on the following terms :

"The post is purely temporary and would be terminated either (i) after 179 days or (ii) if and whei1 the regular incumbent joins, whichever of the two conditions is fulfilled earlier.

If the candidate is interested to serve on the abovenoted terms, he/she is required to attend the interview to be held. on...."

In our opinion, the terms of advertisement and the offer are binding on the petitioners and having regard to the same it is not possible to Continue the appointment by directing regularisation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that the fixation of period of 179 days was itself arbitrary. Reliance was placed on Sri Rabinarayan Mohapatra v. state of Orissa and others (AIR 1991 Supreme Court, 1286) and Karnataka State, Private College Stop-gap Lecturers Association v. State of Karnataka and others (1992 LIC 575). It would appear from the facts of the former case that the person concerned had worked for more than four years with repeated spells of breaks in service in view of a particular clause which provided for one day's break after 89 days service. That gave rise to claim for regularisation, which was upheld. In that connection it was observed that in order to make the existing educational set-up effective and efficient it is necessary to do away with ad-hocism in teaching appointments and that an appointment on 89 days basis with one day break depriving the teacher of his salary for the period of summa vacation and other service benefits was arbitrary. In the latter case also, in terms of the relevant clause, appointment for a period of three months or less in the institution was to be made subject to the approval of the Director which could be continued for a further period of not more than three months with one day's break. The apex court having regard