Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
M.M.Kumar and M.M.S.Bedi JJ.
Sunita Rani
Versus
State Of Haryana
CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 5339 of 2006,
Decided On : MAY 8, 2006
Termination - Contract Employment - Extension of Period of Employment
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were inducted in service as ANM under a specific scheme. Their services were terminated in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract employment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that since the petitioners were employed on a contract basis and their services were terminated in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract, no mandamus could be issued for extending the period of employment.
Issues: The issue revolved around the termination of services of the petitioners and the possibility of extending the period of employment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the constitution Bench judgment of the HON BLE Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others V/s. Umadevi and others, JT 2006 (4) SC 420, which held that no mandamus can be issued for extending the period of employment in the case of contract employment.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as no illegality could be found in the impugned order of termination.
M. M. KUMAR, J.
1. It is admitted position that the petitioners were inducted in service as ANM under the Re-productive and Child Health Programme scheme on 19.4.2005. Their services have been terminated on 23.2.2006. Some of the persons who were working on the post of ANM filed C. W. P. No.9673 of 2004 and this Court had stayed the operation of the termination order qua those persons on 30.1.2006 (P-7 ). However, such like order can c. W. P. No.5339 of 2006 [1] no longer be passed because once the petitioners are employed on 89 days basis and their services have been terminated in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract employment then according to the constitution Bench judgment of the HON BLE Supreme Court no mandamus can be issued by this Court for extending the period of employment. The aforementioned view has been taken by the HON BLE Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others V/s. Umadevi and others, JT 2006 (4) SC 420. Therefore, no illegality could be found in the impugned order. For the reason aforementioned, this petition fails and the same is dismissed.
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
