Long-term temporary employees serving over ten years acquire a legitimate expectation of regularisation, per jurisprudence established under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

Order :

FARJAND ALI, J.

1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of appropriate writs to safeguard their legitimate rights emanating from their long, unbroken, and substantive engagement as Veterinary Officers on sanctioned and vacant posts. Despite the unequivocal directions of this Court in its judgment dated 19.01.2017 and the binding mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 495/2020, the respondents continue to subject the petitioners to arbitrary annual extensions coupled with erratic disbursement of salary. The petitioners, therefore, beseech this Court’s intervention for continuity of service, consideration for regularisation, and timely payment of all consequential service benefits.

2. Briefly stated, the writ petition was originally instituted by seven petitioners. During its pendency, Petitioner No. 7, Dr. Naresh Nagar, unfortunately expired, and his name was deleted vide order dated 03.03.2023. Consequently, six petitioners remained on record, and as of now, only three Dr. Ramakant Soni (P-2), Dr. Surendra Kumar (P-4), and Dr. Shahdab Ahmed Khan (P-5) seek the indulgence of this Court, the others having already selected through RPSC.

2.1 The petitioners possess B.V.Sc. & A.H. degrees from recognized institutions and are duly registered with the Rajasthan State Veterinary Council, rendering them fully qualified under the RAJASTHAN ANIMAL HUSBANDRY SERVICE RULES , 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1963’). Owing to an acute manpower exigency, the respondents issued an Urgent Temporary Basis (UTB) Recruitment Advertisement on 14.03.2013 for approximately 500 posts under Rule 26 of the Rules of 1963. Upon being duly recommended by the Selection Committee with RPSC approval, the petitioners were appointed vide order dated 19.09.2013, joining service by 29.09.2013, and have continued since uninterruptedly, albeit temporarily and without regular pay.

2.2 Simultaneously, RPSC notified a regular recruitment on 02.05.2013 for 525 posts. The petitioners qualified the written exam, appeared for interviews, and secured the minimum 50% qualifying marks, yet were not selected. The process became embroiled in prolonged litigation, leaving several posts unfilled. Their services were abruptly terminated on 30.06.2016, prompting multiple writ petitions wherein interim protection was granted, thereby ensuring continuity of service. Extensions continued, including via order dated 30.11.2016.

2.3 This Court, in its judgment dated 19.01.2017, recorded that 150 out of 525 posts remained unfilled and directed their filling from the reserve list while continuing the petitioners in service with regular salary. Non-compliance ensued, triggering contempt proceedings. The matter ascended to the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which on 21.01.2020 remanded it for determining SC/ST backlog vacancies. Upon remand, this Court identified 14 available posts, eventually allocating one to Dr. Narendra Singh (P-6), who joined on 29.09.2023. Similarly situated petitioners, however, remained excluded.

2.4 Proceedings were further delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and only on 10.08.2021 was the controversy addressed, pursuant to which Dr. Narendra Singh alone secured appointment. The remaining petitioners despite identical merit received neither regularisation nor appointment under Recruitment-2013. Their salary continued to be irregular, contingent upon repetitive RPSC approvals. Earlier writ petitions for pay parity were partly allowed on 20.01.2020, granting petitioners Minimum of Pay Scale under Jagjit Singh, while keeping the issue of regulari