Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JIYA LAL BHARDWAJ
Tripta Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility fixed as on application submission deadline by courts (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. petitioners claim parity with regularly appointed candidates; state cites policy (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. contract appointments discriminatory, violate article 14 equality principle (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. direct regularization of petitioners' appointments with benefits (Para 18 , 19) |
The petitioners, by way of present writ petition, have prayed that the respondents be directed to offer them appointment on the posts of Supervisor on regular basis, instead of contract basis and further consider them on regular cadre from the date when the respondents issued the regular appointment orders to 238 candidates with all consequential benefits.
2. The petitioners were initially appointed as Anganwari Workers at different Anganwari Centres in the State of Himachal Pradesh by the respondents and they were discharging their duties with them.
3. On 22.10.2002, the respondents issued advertisement for filling-up the posts of Supervisors (ICDS) and the minimum eligibility criteria was that the Anganwari Workers, who have passed 10th stan
State cannot discriminate by granting contract appointments to successful litigants from same selection process while providing regular appointments to others, violating Article 14 equality.
Anganwadi Workers selected for Supervisor posts are entitled to substantive appointments and benefits retroactively from their initial engagement date, regardless of contractual arrangements.
A contractual appointment cannot preclude an eligible employee from being promoted to a regular cadre post if they meet the qualifications and service requirements, ensuring compliance with Articles ....
Long-serving contract employees with sanctioned appointments are entitled to regularization despite initial contractual terms, as established by judicial precedents.
Appointments made against statutory provisions are void ab initio, and eligibility criteria must be strictly adhered to.
The State/respondents have spectacularly failed to give any reason for appointing the candidates from the second list and not from the first list who had a reasonable expectation to be appointed. Fur....
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 impermiss....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
