The court emphasized the importance of treating ad-hoc services as continuous for all purposes and the belated nature of recovery actions.

JUDGMENT :

BIREN VAISHNAV, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents-State.

2. The prayer in the petition is to quash and set aside the orders dated 27.07.2020 and 22.02.2021, by which, the request for counting the earlier service tenure of the petitioner as ad-hoc lecturer from 08.03.2001 as continuous and regular with the period of service from 27.11.2009, the date of which the petitioner was regularly appointed, has been rejected.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the entire period from 08.03.2001 to 27.11.2009 must be treated as continuous for the purposes of pay, leave, pension and other consequential benefits to the petitioner. Also under challenge is the order dated 26.03.2021, by which, recovery has been made on the salary of the petitioner of the 6th Pay Commission on the ground that during the ad-hoc tenure, the petitioner was not entitled to the benefits of regular service.

4. Mr. Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioner, would rely on an orders passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 6312 of 2021 and Special Civil Application No. 1052 of 2020. Order dated passed in SCA No. 1052 of 2020, read as under:

“1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent State.

2. With the consent of learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

3. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed to direct the respondents to consider the ad-hoc tenure of service of the petitioners as continuous for all purposes by clubbing that period with the period post the selection of the petitioners by the GPSC for the purposes of pay, leave, pension and other consequential service benefits and grant of pay protection.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that they are working as Lecturers, Class-2 in the Government Polytechnic Colleges. Initially, they were appointed on ad-hoc basis in the year 2008-2009. After some time, they were regularly selected in the years 2015-16 after having successfully undergone the selection process through the GPSC. The prayers are therefore in that context.

5. Mr. Ekrama Qureshi learned counsel for the petitioners would rely on an order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 6312 of 2021 and allied matters, wherein, a similar issue was considered by this Court. The Court relying on a decision rendered in Special Civil Application No. 6907 of 2021 held as under:

“5. This Court in Special Civil Application No. 6907 of 2021, had considered the issue of clubbing ad-hoc services together with regular services post selection after undergoing the GPSC examinations and also with regard to the question of recovery and entitlement of AGP of Rs. 7,000/-. The order dated 04.04.2022 reads as under:

“1. By an order dated 02.03.2022, the grievances raised by the petitioner were set out. The order dated 02.03.2022 reads as under:

“1. Three fold grievances have been raised by the petitioner in the present petition.

2. Firstly, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 01.04.2021 by which, the benefits of the 6th Pay Commission with effect from 01.01.2006 to 10.05.2009 are sought to be recovered on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible to the same.

3. Mr. Ketan Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner’s initial appointment on ad-hoc basis was in a pay scale, there was no break in service inasmuch as, on being appointed on an ad-hoc Lecturer she continued to served on ad-hoc basis from 12.04.1993 to 10.05.2009 without a break. She joined the Degree College on 11.05.2009. In the order of recovery, reliance is placed on the communications dated 19.03.2015 (Page 80) and 18.07.2020 (Page 81).

4. This Court by an order dated 23.04.2021 has granted ad-interim relief against the recovery. Mr. Dave