IMPORTANT POINT
The regularisation of services of the contingency staff should be based on seniority as per the General Arunachal Pradesh Service Group 'C' Common Recruitment Rules, 2011 and the Office Memorandum, dated 09.01.2012.

JUDGMENT :

(N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.) :

Heard Mr. K. Tari, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. L. Perme, learned standing counsel for the Agriculture Department, representing respondent Nos. 1 & 2; Mr. I. Riram, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 3 & 4 and Mr. K. Taja, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5.

2. This intra-court appeal has been instituted assailing the judgment and order, dated 02.06.2023, passed by this Court in WP(C)295(AP)2020 by which the regularisation of the services of the appellant/ respondent No. 9 against a vacant post of Peon in the establishment of Deputy Director, Agriculture Department, Government of Arunachal Pradesh was set aside and quashed.

3. The facts leading to the institution of the present proceedings may be noticed as under.

The respondent No. 5/writ petitioner was engaged as a contingency staff in the office of District Agriculture Officer, Lower Subansiri District, Ziro, Government of Arunachal Pradesh on 02.05.2023. The appellant/respondent No. 9 was also engaged as a contingency staff in the same office on 18.01.2016. The Deputy Director, Agriculture, Lower Subansiri District, issued a Notice dated 04.06.2019 requiring the Contingency staff engaged in his establishment to submit their respective performance report for the years 2016-2017, 2017-2018 and 2019 along with attested copies of their educational certificate within a period of 1(one) week from the date of issuance of the said notice. In pursuance to the said notice the contingency staff working in the establishment of the Deputy Director, Agriculture, Lower Subansiri Districts, including the Respondent No.5/writ petitioner and the appellant/Respondent no.9 submitted their respective particulars. Thereafter, the said particulars as submitted by the contingency staff came to be placed before a Board constituted by the Government for the purpose of considering the case of contingency staff for regularisation of their services. The Board considered the cases of all the Contingency staff and thereafter on assessing the relevant records, performance reports, overall efficiency including expertise, discipline integrity resolved to recommend the case of the appellant/respondent no.9 for regularisation of his services against a vacant post of Peon becoming available in the establishment on the retirement of the incumbent therein. In terms of the recommendation as made in his favour, the services of the appellant/respondent no. 9 came to be so regularised vide order dated 18.06.2019 issued by the Deputy Director, Agriculture, Lower Subansiri District. The respondent no.5/writ petitioner being aggrieved by the issuance of the said order dated 18.06.2019 approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C) No. 295/2020 assailing the same.

The said order dated 18.06.2019 was assailed by the respondent no. 5/writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge, inter-alia, on the ground that the same was so issued in clear violation of the provisions of the Office Memorandum, dated 09.01.2012 as well as the provisions of the General Arunachal Pradesh Service Group ‘C’ Common Recruitment Rules, 2011. It was contended by respondent no. 5/writ petitioner that a minimum service of 20 years as contingent staff was necessary for being considered for regularisation of the services of a contingent worker against a regular post. The appellant/respondent No. 9 having been appointed as contingency staff only on 18.01.2016, he does not fulfil the residency requirement under the said OM dated 09.01.2012 and accordingly, his case could not have been considered for such regularization. It was further highlighted before the learned Single Judge that the regularization of the services of the contingency staff was required to effected by reckoning the seniority of the contingent workers, however, in the process as initiated leading to the regularization of services of the appellant/ responden