Contractual employment lacks statutory protection unless established through mandatory recruitment processes under the Delhi School Education Act; mere extension of contracts does not confer permanent status.

JUDGMENT

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

CM APPL. 154/2021 (of the appellant for early hearing)

1. Only the counsel for the respondent no.3 Directorate of Education (DoE) appears on advance notice.

2. Be that as it may, need is not felt to issue notice of this application to the other respondents.

3. For the reasons stated, the application is allowed and disposed of and the LPA is taken up for hearing today itself.

LPA 482/2019 & CM No.33095/2019 (for stay)

4. Though, the appeal was listed before this Court on a number of occasions but a perusal of the orders show that no notice of the appeal has been issued till now and only the counsel for the DoE has been appearing on advance notice. We have thus requested the counsel for the appellant to argue the appeal for admission.

5. The appeal impugns the order dated 1st July, 2019 of the Single Judge of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.6914/2019 preferred by the appellant, seeking direction to the respondent no.1 Balvantray Mehta Vidya Bhawan Anguridevi Shersingh Memorial Academy-Second Shift (School), an unaided recognised school and the respondent no.2 Servants of the People Society (Delhi) (Society) which has set up the respondent no.1 School, to (a) regularise the services of the appellant in the respondent no.1 School on the permanent post of Office Attendant, at par with similar employees working in the same post in Delhi Government Schools under the Delhi School Education Act, 1973; (b) fix the Grade Pay of the appellant in terms of the recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission, with effect from the date of appointment of the appellant; and, (c) pay arrears of salary found due to the appellant with interest.

6. The writ petition came up before the Single Judge on 1st July, 2019, when finding that the respondent no.1 School had issued a Show Cause Notice dated 28th May, 2019 to the appellant and the appellant had also filed a reply thereto and recording the statement of the counsel for the respondent no.1 School that a preliminary inquiry had been initiated and if required, a regular departmental inquiry shall be conducted against the appellant, the petition was disposed of as premature.

7. The counsel for the appellant, on enquiry states that no further action was taken against the appellant by the respondent no.1 School pursuant to the said show cause notice and the preliminary inquiry stated to have been conducted.

8. The argument of the counsel for the appellant is, that (i) the appellant was appointed as Office Attendant in the respondent no.1 School, on contractual basis, with effect from 1st April, 2014 on a consolidated salary; (ii) the said contract of the appellant was renewed from time to time, last till 30th June, 2019, whereafter the Show Cause Notice dated 28th May, 2019 was issued to the appellant; (iii) there is no termination of the employment of the appellant and the appellant is merely prohibited from entering the school; and, attention is drawn to Rule 105 of the DELHI SCHOOL EDUCATION RULES , 1973 and it is argued that thereunder the employment of the appellant in the respondent no.1 School, even if contractual, is deemed to have been confirmed after the expiry of two years; it is argued that the appellant worked in the respondent no.1 School contractually, for a period of five years and is deemed to be a permanent employee of the respondent no.1 School, under the statutory protection; reliance is placed on Army Public School Vs. Narendra Singh Nain, 2013 SCC OnLine Del 3351 and which has been screen-shared during the hearing and it is stated that the appeal preferred thereagainst to the Division Bench was also dismissed; reference