JUDGMENT :

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.

The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the speaking order dated 03.09.2024, Annexure P-9, whereby the petitioners’ prayer to frame a policy of regularisation has been rejected. Further, a writ of mandamus has been sought directing the respondents to regularise them in service on the posts of Assistant Professors in their respective Departments from the date of initial appointment on contract basis, with consequential benefits.

2.1. The petition has been filed with the averments that the petitioners fulfill the requisite qualifications for the post of Assistant Professor laid down by the University Grants Commission (UGC)/All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE).They were given contractual appointment as Teaching Associates on consolidated salary in various Departments of the respondent-University on the recommendations of ad hoc selection committee(s), pursuant to advertisement(s) inviting applications for ‘walk-in-interview’. The appointment letters were issued on different dates between 2010-2015, collectively appended to the petition as Annexure P-2, and they accordingly joined their respective Departments, viz., Computer Science and Engineering, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Mechanical Engineering, Food Technology, Mass Communication and Physiotherapy.

2.2. The petitioners continued working in the University as Teaching Associates on the terms they were initially appointed, and approached this Court by filing writ petitions, CWP-27822-2018 titled Komal Dhanda and others v. Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology, Hisar and others, and CWP-11723-2019 titled Vishal Kumar and others v. Guru Jambheshwar University of Science and Technology Hisar, inter alia, seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the condition in their appointment letters whereunder they were engaged on consolidated salary, instead of minimum of pay scale meant for the post of Assistant Professor. Also, a writ of mandamus was sought directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to work till regular incumbents join, and not to replace them with other contractual employees. Other directions to give minimum of pay scale meant for the post of Assistant Professor, with vacation period salary, were also sought. The petition was disposed of vide order dated 21.08.2019, Annexure P-4, and in terms therewith the petitioners continued in service, and the University started paying them minimum of pay scale.

2.3. It has also been averred that there are sanctioned posts in the University against which the petitioners are working. To substantiate, reliance has been placed on office order, dated 01.10.2019, Annexure P-5, whereby the Vice-Chancellor has ordered that salary of contractual/guest teachers will be drawn against the posts lying vacant in their respective Departments.

2.4. Meanwhile, the University has issued advertisements 4 to 19/2023 inviting applications for regular Assistant Professors in the Departments where the petitioners are working, and the selection process is in advance stage. In case the process concludes, the petitioners will be removed after more than fourteen years of service which will seriously prejudice their rights. They submitted representations, including legal notice dated 07.03.2024, seeking regularisation of service which was wrongly rejected vide the impugned speaking order dated 03.09.2024.

3. In this factual background, learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the petitioners were appointed after rigorous process of selection on the recommendation of the ad hoc selection committee(s). They fulfill the requisite qualifications for the post of Assistant Professor in their respective Departments, and have rendered more than ten years of unblemished service. Their work and duties are identical to the ones assigned to regular Assistant Professors, and it has also been established vide office order dated 01.10.2019, that they are working against