The entire work and conduct of an ad hoc employee must enter into consideration right up to the date of the order of his regularization.

S.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

1. Whether the misconduct committed by an ad hoc Government employee after March 31, 1977, would enter into consideration of the appointing authority whilst taking a decision in terms of the Presidential Order dated the 3rd of May, 1977, for regularisation of such an employee is the question of law of some importance that falls for consideration in this case.

2. Though the question posed is of general application, yet inevitably the relevant facts of the present case before us have to be kept in sharp focus and, therefore, before embarking upon the consideration of the legal question, these require to be noticed in some detail at the very threshold.

3. The petitioner was appointed as a steno-typist on an entirely ad hoc basis on the 1st of September, 1975 in Guru Teg Bahadur Government College, Sathiala, District Amritsar. He continued to hold the said post till the 28th of June, 1978, when his services were terminated. However, in pursuance of the stay order granted in this writ petition he was allowed to rejoin his duty on 20th of July, 1978. It is the common case that having completed more than one years service by 31st March, 1977, the petitioner became eligible for being considered for the regularisation of his services. Indeed his case was forwarded to the appropriate authority for this purpose. However, respondent No. 3, not finding the work and conduct of the petitioner as satisfactory, terminated his services which order is now sought to be impugned.

4. Now the firm and virtually the unrebutted stand of the respondent- State in this context is that the petitioner had brought two hoodlums with him to the College premises and launched a murderous assault against Shri Jarnail Singh, Head Clerk of the institution. The latter escaped injury by hastily retreating from the spot and later lodged a report at the Police Station, Beas. Apparently during the investigation of the criminal case departmental proceedings were also initiated against the petitioner and the Assistant Director Cadet Corps was appointed an lquiry Officer. He con ducted a detailed enquiry after affording the fullest opportunity to the petitioner and then rendered his report, annexure R. 3 to the return. Therein he concluded on facts as follows:

"I reached the conclusion that Sh. Baldev Singh ad hoc Steno-typist brought two boys on 28-2-1978 at evening and tried to attack the Head Clerk and at the time Sh. Baldev Singh himself was present there. The preliminary investigation was conducted by the Thana Beas, but it seems like this that as this incident happened inside the premises of the college and according to him police could not enter in the college unless permission was given by the Principal to enter into the college. That is why police has not taken up this case seriously and the second reason may be that because there was no loss of life and also there was no injury. Due to these reasons p olice did not feel to interfere in such routine cases."

In the light of the aforesaid finding it was recommended that instead of the services of the petitioner being regularised these should be terminated with immediate effect. Apparently in compliance therewith the petitioners services were dispensed with by an innocuous order.

5. It deserves recalling at the very threshold that this reference to the larger Bench was necessitated by a challenge raised against the correctness of the Division Bench judgment in Smt. Prem Lata V/s. State of Punjab, (1978) 2 Serv LR 122. A reference to that judgment would make it plain that the learned Judges relied primarily and perhaps entirely on the ratio of Parvez Qadir V/s. Union of India, AIR 1975 SC 446: (1975 Lab IC 244), for arriving at the conclusion which they did, After profusely quoting from the aforesaid judgment it was expressly observed therein that the ratio of the aforesaid case completely covers the facts of Prem Latas case. With respect I would say that the aforesaid case is completely d