The absence of any rule, regulation, or policy decision for the regularization of contractual appointees and the need to discourage frivolous litigation.

JUDGMENT :

CM No. 2762/2022

1. This is an application by the applicants, namely Mohsin Farooq Kawa and Manzoor Shafi Bhat seeking their impleadment as party- respondents. They are seeking their impleadment on the ground that they are working against the posts of Jr. Engineers against which the petitioners herein have been selected in the selection process conducted by respondent No. 2. The applicants claim that they, by performing their continuous duties for more than seven years, have acquired the right of regularization and, therefore, no selection against the posts held by them could be made. They also claim that the selection process conducted by the respondents which has culminated in selection of the petitioners is only an eye wash and conducted only to show door to them.

2. Having heard learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record, I find this application grossly misconceived. The applicants are admittedly the holding the posts of Jr. Engineer (Electrical) and Jr. Engineer (Civil) respectively purely on contractual basis for a specified period. They were initially appointed on contractual basis on a consolidated salary of Rs. 20,000/- per month for 59 days. However, their appointments were extended from time to time. The order of their engagement itself makes it clear that their engagement was purely contractual and shall not confer upon them any right or claim on the posts held by them. Their engagement was also provided to be terminable at any time without any advance notice by the respondents. Such being the nature of engagement of the applicants, the argument of Mr. J.H. Reshi, learned counsel, appearing for the applicants, that the applicants are entitled to regularization and that respondent No. 2 cannot fill up the posts held by them on regular basis, can only be termed as 'misconceived'.

3. The applicants have not been able to bring to the notice of this Court any Rule, Regulation or policy decision of respondent No. 2 with regard to regularization of the services of contractual appointees like the applicants. That apart, the conduct of the applicants exhibited by them before this Court as well as the Civil Court disentitles them to any discretionary relief from this Court.

4. As is elaborately taken note in the judgment below, the first attempt made by the applicants to stall the regular selection process was the filing of WP(C) No. 2602/2021. Having regard to the nature of right a contractual appointee has, this Court while issuing notice to the respondents provided by way of interim arrangement that, if the applicants were in position, they would be allowed to continue till regular selection to fill up the posts held by them was concluded and fresh appointments were made. Obviously, this did not suit the applicants and they approached the Civil Court by way of a civil suit suppressing the factum of filing the writ petition and its pendency before this Court. They even succeeded in persuading the Civil Court to pass an interim order of status quo on 15.12.2021. The said status quo order became impediment in the way of respondent No. 2 to issue the appointment orders in favour of the petitioners herein. Be that as it may, the interim order passed by the Civil Court on 15.12.2021 was stayed by the Appellate Court on 29.01.2022. With a view to avoid serious consequences of suppression made before the Civil Court, the applicants, acting smartly, withdrew the writ petition on 18.05.2022.

5. In the aforesaid circumstances, the conduct of the applicants cannot be appreciated and deserves to be dealt with appropriately. Having regard to their locus to intervene in this writ petition, suffice it to say that the instant writ petition is directed against respondent No. 2 seeking, inter alia, a Writ of Mandamus to respondent No. 2 to issue the appointment orders in favour of the writ petitioners pursuant to the selection made by him. Indisputably, the applicants herein too have participated in the selection process