Honble PARIHAR, J.–Since on similar set of facts, the same relief have been claimed in the above review petitions, on the request of the learned counsel for the parties both the review petitions have been heard together and been decided by this common order.

(2). The petitioners are seeking review of the order dated 21.07.1997 passed by this Court Reliance have been placed on a circular/notification issued by the State Government on 6.4.1993, by which the Member Secretary, State Law Commission, Rajasthan, Jaipur has also been added in the list of Head of Departments Class-I as appended to the Rajasthan Service Rules.

(3). There is no dispute that the petitioners were appointed purely on adhoc/temporary basis by the State Law Commission for a fixed tenure. The very nature of constitution of the State Law Commission shows that the same was constituted for a particular purpose with a fixed tenure. The State Law Commission was also given powers to recruit and appoint employees at its own convenience for the purpose of functioning of State Law Commission. There has been a clear stipulation in the letter of appointment of the petitioners also in this regard. By no stretch of imagination it can be said that such temporary/adhoc recruitees appointed by the State Law Commission in any way be treated as State Government employees so as to give them, benefit of surplus employees rules or otherwise for absorption or regularisation in the other Government Departments.

(4). It has further been observed in the judgment itself that earlier if any irregularity or illegality have been committed by the State Government by transferring such employees on regular post of other Government Department, the Court cannot be a party for perpetuating the same. If the prayer as made by the petitioners is accepted then it will open a flood gate for back door entries on the same para meters. The employees of many temporary commissions constituted for a fixed tenure and specific purpose like the State Law Commission will come forward for their absorption in the Government Departments, Moreso, when no material has been placed on record in regard to manner in which such commissions are required to recruit the adhoc temporary employees. There is also no such rule pointed out by the counsel for the parties under which the adhoc temporary employees of such commissions can be transferred to other Government Departments on regular posts. Such practice, if any, would itself violate Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.

(5). So far as amendment/notification as relied upon by the petitioners in the present review petition is concerned, there may be cases where some of the regular employees of State Govt. might go or be sent on deputation to such commission and to govern their services, the amendment may be relevant but the adhoc temporary employees appointed by the commission with a clear stipulation in the letter of appo- intment itself can never be treated as State Govt. Employees. Even the courts specially the Supreme Court has strongly. Deprecated such practice of back door entries.

(6). Since the whole matter has duly been considered by this Court vide order dated 21.7.1997, in my opinion, no further review is called for in the present matter.

(7). Accordingly, both the review petitions are dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document