Temporary employees have no right to hold the post and their services are liable to be terminated in accordance with relevant service rules and terms of the contract of service.

JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. In this present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the writ petitioner has prayed for an order for not giving effect to the letter of termination dated 28.06.2021, as issued by the Commissioner of respondent no.3, Howrah Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Corporation’ in short) and at the same time she has prayed for an appropriate order to reinstate her at the post from where she was terminated.

2. The facts leading to filing of the instant writ petition in short is as under:-

i. The petitioner was appointed by the Corporation by issuing an appointment letter dated 14.10.2015 as a music instructor at Howrah Sangeet O Nritya Academy on a temporary basis with effect from 15.10.2015.

ii. The petitioner joined in such post on 17.10.2015.

iii. Prior to her joining her erstwhile employer i.e President of Laskarpur Rabindra Bidyapith for Girls’ (H.S) on 16.10.2015 granted her lien to join the aforementioned post.

iv. The service of the writ petitioner was terminated by the respondent no.3/Corporation by issuing a letter dated 28.06.2021 which is impugned in this writ petition.

3. In support of the instant writ petition learned advocate for the writ petitioner submits that in the impugned letter of termination dated 28.06.2021 a filmsy reason has been assigned by the respondent no.3/Corporation that since the tenancy of the flat where the said academy was operating had come to an end, the said academy would cease to operate and function any further and accordingly the service of the writ petitioner was no more required. Drawing attention of this Court to the affidavit-in-opposition as filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5, it is argued that in the said affidavit-in-opposition of the Corporation it has been admitted that the said academy is still functioning at 14, Gopal Lal Chakraborty Lane, Bureau No. V. Placing his reliance upon the supplementary affidavit as filed by the petitioner, it is contended that the other staff who were attached to the academy had already been accommodated to the other offices of the Corporation which would be evident from the Annexures to the said supplementary affidavit. It is thus argued that the respondent Corporation and its authorities had taken a double stand which is not permissible in the law. It is thus argued that appropriate orders may be passed in terms of the prayer of the writ petition.

4. In course of hearing learned advocate for the State/respondent no.1 has handed over a Letter bearing No.892(2)-ICA (N) dated 14.03.2022 as written by the Joint Secretary to the Govt. of West Bengal, Department of Information and Cultural Affairs addressed to the Ld. Additional Government Pleader and in the body of the said letter the following has been written:

“1. That this Department has never attached itself with the formation and activities of “Howrah Sangeet-Nritya Academy”

2. The Ld. Advocate of Howrah Municipal Corporation has admitted, as noted in para-4 of the order passed on 28.09.2022 by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court that “the academy started as a temporary enterprise under the policy of the Government. The State Government did not approve such project and, as such, the music school ceased to exist.”;

It is submitted by him that the said academy started functioning on a temporary basis and the State Government did not approve such project and as such the said academy is now cease to exist.

5. Learned Advocate for the respondent nos. 3,4 and 5 i.e the Corporation and its authorities in course of his argument also draws attention of this Court to the appointment letter dated 14.10.2015 as issued by the Commissioner of the respondent no.3/Corporation. It is contended that from the said letter of appointment it would reveal that the appointment of the petitioner is purely on temporary basis. It is further contended that on account of such temporary nature of appointment, the writ petitioner cannot claim any right o