IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the retrospective application of amended rules introducing contractual mode of appointments to the disadvantage of the incumbents is impermissible and violates the constitutional rights of the incumbents.

JUDGMENT :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Notice. Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. With the consent of the parties, the instant writ petition is taken up for disposal, at this stage, in view of the peculiar facts as borne out from the pleadings.

3. The petitioners, initially appointed as Trained Graduate Teachers (TGTs) and some are presently working as Lecturer, School Cadre, have filed the instant writ petition with the following prayer(s):-

“(I) That the initial appointment of petitioners may kindly be directed to be deemed to be on regular basis instead of contract basis with all consequential benefits as held in similar case of Kuldip Chand vs. State of H.P. in CWP No.414/2014.

ii) That the pay of the petitioners be accordingly directed to be re-fixed w.e.f. initial appointment and for the purpose of retiral benefits and pay etc. be released, in the interest of justice.”

4. In the background, of the reliefs prayed for above, the brief facts and that the respondents commenced the selection process for appointment to the post of Trained Graduate Teachers [Arts/Medical/Non Medical] in 2008-2009, on contract basis, on Batch wise Basis, in the Department of Education, of the State Government in accordance with the Himachal Pradesh Education Department, Class-III (School and Inspection Cadre) Services Rules, 1973 but, instead of appointing them on regular basis as Trained Graduate Teachers [Arts/Medical/Non Medical] they were appointed on contractual basis in 2008-2009. The petitioners continued as such and they were regularized in the year 2015.

5. Now, the only grievance of the petitioners is that though as per the Himachal Pradesh, Education Department Class-III [School and Inspection Cadre] Service Rules, 1973, the petitioners had undergone selection for appointment as TGT [Arts/Medical/Non Medical] in 2008-2009 on regular basis but, were wrongly and illegally appointed on contract basis when, contractual mode-nomenclature of appointment was introduced in the Himachal Pradesh Elementary Education Department, [Class-III] [Non Gazetted], Recruitment and Promotion Rules on 17.05.2010 and once these Rules of 2010 were only prospective in nature then, the petitioners could not have been appointed on contract basis, meaning thereby, that the petitioners had a right to be appointed on regular basis from the date of initial appointment.

In this background, the action of the respondents in denying the “deemed regular appointment” to the petitioners, as TGTs [Arts/Medical/Non Medical] in 2008-2009 from the date they were appointed as such on contract basis [prior to insertion of contractual mode-nomenclature of appointment in the Recruitment and Promotion Rules for Trained Graduate Teachers on 22.10.2009]; has resulted in depriving the petitioners of the regular status, regular pay scale, pay fixation in regular pay scale, benefit of ACP from such deemed regular date, higher pay in revised pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and higher pay till day is a recurring loss till day. Even this action has resulted in depriving the petitioners of the pension on superannuation which is violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.

6. The question, as to whether the incumbents who had undergone selection for the post of Trained Graduate Teachers or for the post of Lecturers (School Cadre) under the Himachal Pradesh Education Department Class-III, (School and Inspection Cadre) Service Rules 1973 for regular posts, in the regular pay scales, could be appointed on contractual basis in the years 2008 and 2009 when, the contractual mode-nomenclature of appointment was introduced by issuing the Amended Rules on 22.10.2009 [in case of Trained Graduate Teachers] and on 22.09.2010 [in case of Lecturers School Cadre], and once the amended rules cannot be applied retrospectively, to selection undertaken under the amended Rules but were to apply prospectively only; stands adjudica