Delay in creating posts cannot affect the rights of contractual employees for regularization after completing the requisite service period.

JUDGMENT :

Satyen Vaidya, J.

1. All these petitions have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment as the common questions of facts and law arise.

2. The petitioners in all these petitions are the employees of Special Area Development Authorities (for short “SADA”). The details, in respect of petitioners, necessary for the issue involved herein can be summarized as under:

3. All the petitioners were initially engaged on contract basis. Their services were regularized w.e.f. 25.08.2015 in pursuance to the communication dated 27.05.2015 issued by the Director, Town & Country Planning Department, Himachal Pradesh.

4. Petitioners are seeking their regularization in terms of relevant regularisation policy of the State Government which interalia provided for consideration of services of contractual employees for regularisation on completion of six years of contractual service.

5. Respondents No. 1 & 2 have filed their reply. It has been submitted that the petitioners had accepted the regularization of their services w.e.f. 25.08.2015 without any objection and hence they cannot go now back on the terms and conditions of their regularization. The petitions have also been challenged being time barred.

6. Respondent No.3 has filed its separate reply. It has been submitted that as per communication dated 28.06.2014, the eligibility of contractual employees for regularization was subject to availability of vacancies and the regularization was also to be with prospective effect. It has been submitted that the SADAs were constituted in furtherance of the objective of Section 70 of the Himachal Pradesh Town and Country Planning Act. The respective SADAs had engaged the services of petitioners on contract basis without there being any vacancy or existing post.

7. It has also been projected by respondent No.3 that requests were made by respondent No.3 to respondent No.2 for creation of posts of different categories in SADAs. Respondent No.1 conveyed its approval for creation of 26 posts of different categories in various SADAs in order to regularize their services. Thereafter, the services of petitioners were regularized vide office memorandum dated 25.08.2015 with immediate effect.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully.

9. Noticeably, the State Government has been coming up with repeated regularization norms for its contractual employees and one such communication can be found on record as Annexure R-2 with the reply of respondents No. 1 and 2. It is a communication dated 4.4.2013 from the Principal Secretary (Personnel) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh conveying the decision of the State Government to regularize the services of all such contractual appointees who had completed six years of contract service as on 31.3.2013. Another communication on record is Annexure A-3 dated 28.6.2014, which also conveyed the decision of the Government to regularize the services of contractual appointee on completion of six years as on 31.3.2014. Prior to these communications also, the regularization norms have been notified by the State Government for regularization of its contractual employees from time to time.

10. It cannot be disputed that all the petitioners had completed more than six years contract services as on 31.03.2013.

11. The stand taken by the respondents is that in terms of regularisation policy the eligibility of the contractual employee for regularization was subject only