IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
R. A. Sharma, J.
SANTOSH KUMAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 20223 Of 1992
Decided On : 01/07/1993
AD HOC APPOINTMENT - FAMILY COURT - U. P. CIVIL COURTS (APPOINTMENT OF AD HOC EMPLOYEES) RULES, 1991 - RULE 4 - AD HOC APPOINTMENT - TERMINATION - AD HOC APPOINTMENT CANNOT BE REPLACED BY ANOTHER AD HOC APPOINTMENT - HOWEVER, AD HOC APPOINTMENT CAN BE REPLACED BY DULY SELECTED CANDIDATE - AD HOC APPOINTMENT CAN BE TERMINATED IF WORK AND CONDUCT OF THE AD HOC APPOINTEE IS NOT SATISFACTORY.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner was appointed as an ad hoc stenographer in the Family Court at Agra. His appointment was for a fixed term, which was extended from time to time. However, his services were not extended beyond February 28, 1992, although he continued to work till March 26, 1992. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the termination of his services and also challenging the advertisement issued for regular selection of a stenographer.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner's appointment was for a fixed term and came to an end automatically on the last date of the term. The court also held that the petitioner had no right to continue as a stenographer in the Family Court as his term had already come to an end.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner's appointment as an ad hoc stenographer was valid? 2. Whether the petitioner's services could be terminated without any prior notice? 3. Whether the petitioner was entitled to continue as a stenographer in the Family Court after the expiry of his term?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the petitioner's appointment as an ad hoc stenographer was valid as it was made in accordance with the U. P. Civil Courts (Appointment of Ad Hoc Employees) Rules, 1991. 2. The court held that the petitioner's services could be terminated without any prior notice as his appointment was for a fixed term and came to an end automatically on the last date of the term. 3. The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to continue as a stenographer in the Family Court after the expiry of his term as he was not selected for the post of stenographer.
Final Decision: The court dismissed both the writ petitions filed by the petitioner.
( 1 ) VIDE Government Order dated November 7, 1990 Family Court at Agra was established for the period upto February 28, 1991. For that Court 13 posts, including six posts of Class IV employees, were sanctioned and these posts were also to continue upto February 28, 1991. The petitioner appeared in the test for appointment to the post of copyist on ad hoc basis and was selected and appointed ad hoc copyist in the Family Court at Agra on April 12, 1991. There was also a post of stenographer for the Court and no stenographer having been selected, the petitioner was appointed on ad hoc basis as stenographer vide order dated May 1, 1991 for fixed term upto june 30, 1991, with the condition that the appointment of the petitioner will come to an end automatically on June 30, 1991, if not terminated earlier. It was also stipulated in the appointment letter that the service of the petitioner can be terminated at any time without any prior notice. Service of the petitioner, as stenographer, was extended from time to time. By every order of extension the service of the petitioner was extended for fixed term with the same terms and conditions, as was contained in original appointment order dated May 1, 1991. By the last order, the petitioner was appointed for fixed period upto February 28, 1992. Thereafter the petitioners services were not extended although he has worked upto March 26, 1992, even though the period of the posts sanctioned for Family Court, Agra, was extended beyond February 28, 1992. The petitioner thereafter filed a Writ Petition No. 14969 of 1992 before this Court for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to continue him as ad hoc stenographer till regular selection is made for the post. In this writ petition this Court, on April 25, 1992, passed the following interim order: "in the meantime petitioner will be allowed to continue on ad hoc post till duly selected candidate is available for the said post and he will also be entitled for his salary. "
( 2 ) AN advertisement was issued on May 23, 1992 inviting applications for regular selection for the post of stenographer. Petitioner, thereafter, filed Writ Petition No. 20223 of 1992, challenging the above advertisement and praying for writ of mandamus directing the respondent not to make any selection and not to interfere with his working as ad hoc stenographer. In that writ petition this Court passed the following interim order, on June 8, 1992: "until further orders interview fixed for June 11, 1992 in pursuance of the notice, filed as annexure SA-1, shall remain stayed. " as will be clear from the facts stated herein-above, the petitioner was not selected as stenographer and was only selected as copyist but was appointed on fixed term as stenographer upto February 28, 1992. Thereafter his appointment has not been extended, although he worked upto March 26, 1992. After this Court granted interim order on April 25, 1992, the petitioner was permitted by Judge, Family Court to work as stenographer, in compliance of this Courts order, and he is to continue till duly selected candidate joins. By filing the second writ petition he has blocked the selection of the candidate with the result that the petitioner is to continue on ad hoc basis, without there being any appointment after February 28, 1992 in his favour for working as stenographer in the Family Court at Agra.
( 3 ) PETITIONERs appointment was for fixed term initially upto June 30, 1991 and thereafter his term was extended upto July 31, 1991. Period of his appointment was again extended upto September 30, 1991 and it continued upto February 28, 1992 with the condition that his appointment will come to an end on the last date of term automatically. When appointments made on fixed term it comes to an end automatically by efflux of time and the appointee has thereafter no right to continue to work on the post. In this connection reference may be made to the decision in director, Institute of Manag
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.