Ad hoc appointments do not confer vested legal rights for continuity of service or regularization unless specifically regularized by the University.

1. Since the above noted special appeals are arising out of the common order dated 7.5.1998 of the learned Single Judge of this Court passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3526/97, 3509/97 and 3357/97 and there are common questions of law involved for consideration of this Court hence, they are being decided by this common order. The appeals were heard finally at the admission stage itself. In all the three writ petitions giving rise to the filing of above noted appeals, the petitioners were initially posted as U.D.Cs; they continued academic pursuit of studies and obtaining higher qualifications by undertaking research work and obtained high degrees.

2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, we deem it appropriate to deal with the facts as in D.B. Civil Special (Writ) No. 314/98 (Dr. Chandgi Ram v. University of Rajasthan) which is being treated as the main case.

3. The appellant-petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "the appellant") who is holding a degree of Ph.D. on the topic "The opposition in the Indian Parliament and the Foreign Policy (since 1952 to May 1964)" being a qualified candidate and since he fulfilled the eligibility conditions as stipulated in the advertisement issued by the respondent-University applied for the post of Director, Students Advisory Bureau for short 'SAB' in October, 1996. The post of Director, SAB is a permanent and sanctioned post which fell vacant after superannuation of another candidate since May-June, 1996. After due verification of the credentials of the appellant, he was given appointment on the post of Director, SAB w.e.f. 13.11.1996 under the provisions of Section 3(3) of the Rajasthan Universities Teachers and Officers (Selection for Appointment) Act No. 18 of 1974 for short "the Act of 1974" on ad hoc basis. From the perusal of the office order issued by the Registrar, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur dated 13.11.1996, (Annexure-3) to the writ petition, it is apparent that the Vice-Chancellor had appointed the appellant on ad hoc basis of 90 days or till further orders or till a duly selected candidate joined, whichever was earlier in the pay scale of 2200-75-2800-100-4000. After his appointment, the appellant started functioning as Director of SAB and his term of appointment, was extended from time to time and during his service tenure nothing adverse against him was reported by the University. However, the services of the appellant were terminated w.e.f. 6.6.1997 (vide Annexure-6) to the writ petition under the orders of the Vice-Chancellor issued by the Registrar, Rajasthan University, Jaipur. It has been stated in the aforesaid order that since the appointment of the appellant was made contrary to the decision and direction issued in the matter of Jai Narain Meena v. University of Rajasthan & ors., (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6378/93) decided on 6.1.1994 by the learned Single Judge of this Court and as it had been made in absence of the sanctioned post and without considering the candidature of other eligible candidates and in absence of any open advertisement and adopting procedure prescribed under the rules, hence his services came to be terminated with immediate effect contrary to the rules and in order to ensure the compliance of the order dated 6.1.1994 passed by this Court in the above noted writ petition after obtaining the concurrence of the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Rajasthan.

4. Aggrieved by the impugned order of termination dated 6.6.1997, the appellant-petitioner preferred a writ petition before this Court vide S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3509/97. The said petition was contested by the respondent-University on the grounds inter alia that the petitioner-appellant is not a permanent employee of the University of Rajasthan and hence was not entitled to avail study leave in order to undertake research work which he did contrary to Rules and without obtaining necessary sanction. However, in reply to show cause notice, the University has not dis