IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.
Mohd. Sazrin - Petitioner
Versus
H.P. University - Respondent.
CWP No. 20772 of 2025
Decided On : 31-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contractual appointments mandated for grant-in-aid charged posts. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. delay, laches, acquiescence bar stale service claims. (Para 2 , 5) |
| 3. selection process implies regular appointment from contractual date. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT :
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.
The petitioner is presently aged 50 years. He has instituted the present writ petition seeking a direction to the respondent-University to treat him as a regular Driver (Heavy Vehicle) from the date of his appointment on contractual basis i.e. 23.05.2006.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.
3. The case.
3(i) The respondent-University issued a notice on 15.10.2005 (Annexure P-1) for recruitment to the post of Drivers. The said notice was based on a circular of even date inviting applications for the post of Drivers including one post of Heavy Vehicle Driver in the pay scale of Rs. 4020-6200/-. The relevant portion of the circular issued by the respondent-University reads as under: -
“Application on the plain paper are invited for the following posts of the driver as per the qualification and eligibility conditions given hereunder: -
Drivers (Heavy Vehicle) in the pay scale of Rs. 4020-120-4260- 140-4400-5000-160-5800-200-6200.
No. of posts
Two
One (SC)
One (UR)
Age: 18 to 45 years
Essential requirement: a citizen of India. Minimum educational qualifications:
On the basis of trade test and interview of persons possessing (i) valid driving license for a heavy vehicle (ii) at least 5 years' experience of driving heavy vehicle. (iii) At least middle pass. However, preference will be given to matriculate and (iv) minimum height 160 CM
Drivers (light vehicle) in the pay scale of Rs. 3330-110-3660-180- 260-140-4400-150-5000-160-5800-200-6200.
No. of posts
Three
Two (UR)
One (SC)
Age: 18 to 45 years
Essential requirement: a citizen of India.”
3(ii) On 14.11.2005, the respondent-University addressed a communication to the Principal Secretary (Education), Government of Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-2), seeking approval of the State Government for filling up the vacant posts of Drivers in H.P. University. As per the contents of the said office communication, in view of the notification dated 22.09.2005 issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Department of Education, the sanctioned vacant posts of Drivers were to be charged against grant-in-aid recoverable from the State Government. Since the posts of Drivers in question were being charged against grant-in-aid, approval was solicited by the University from the State Government for filling up the said posts.
3(iii) The Government of Himachal Pradesh, Department of Education, vide office letter dated 20.01.2006 (Annexure P-3), conveyed its approval for filling up the vacant posts of Drivers (one Heavy Vehicle Driver, three Light Vehicle Drivers) and Lab Attendants (five in number), strictly on contractual basis on a “starting basic pay scale (fixed).” The said office letter further directed that the contractual appointment letter should categorically make it clear that no claim pertaining to regularization or other allied benefits would be entertained. The respondent-University was also directed to re- advertise the posts accordingly.
3(iv) Pursuant to the aforesaid approval granted by the State Government for filling up the vacant posts including one post of Driver (Heavy Vehicle), the respondent-University addressed a letter on 22.02.2006 to the Principal Secretary (Education), Government of Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-4) stating that the selection process conducted by the University had already been completed in December, 2005 and, therefore, the posts could not be re-advertised. It was, however, clarified that appointment letters to the selected candidates would be issued strictly in accordance with the conditions conveyed by the State Government. The relevant portion of the office letter dated 22.02.2006 pertaining to the posts of Driver reads as under: -
“Subject: Approval of the Government
Contractual service cannot be backdated to regular from initial appointment despite prior selection, where government approved only contractual terms, accepted without protest; claim barred by 19-yea....
Delay and laches bar service claims, particularly where acquiescence and potential impact on third-party rights are involved.
Belated service claims for pay increments rejected due to unexplained delay, laches and acquiescence; prolonged inaction implies consent, barring relief to uphold administrative finality.
Belated post-retirement claim to switch from CPF to GPF pension rejected due to unexplained delay, laches, acquiescence by non-response to 2008 opportunity, and factual distinction from precedents on....
Court upheld appointment on a contractual basis as valid under R&P Regulations, citing petitioners' acceptance and principles of delay and acquiescence.
Claims for service regularization must be timely; significant delays can render them inadmissible due to laches.
A claim for family pension can be denied if the termination of employment was based on false documents and the challenge to that termination is barred by delay and acquiescence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.