Contractual employees cannot be replaced without proper justification, and interim protections cannot be repeated if granted previously.

ORDER ON MISC APPLICATION NO. 4281/2025

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :

The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed on behalf of 457 contractual employees engaged with the Mohalla Clinics of the Government of NCT of Delhi, comprising 172 Pharmacists, 145 Mohalla Clinic Assistants, and 140 Multi-Tasking Workers, seeking protection of their services during the pendency of the associated Original Application No. 3160 of 2025 before this Tribunal. The reliefs sought in the M.A. are as under:-

“a) Pass an order staying the impugned recruitment notification issued by the Government of NCT of Delhi;

b) Pass an order or direction directing the Respondents not to terminate, discontinue, or otherwise displace the applicants from their present services in the Mohalla Clinics, and to continue giving them work and continue them in service during the pendency of the present proceedings;

c) Pass an order or direction restraining the Respondents from making any fresh contractual appointments against the very posts which are presently occupied by the applicants, in violation of the settled law that one set of contractual employees cannot be replaced by another set of contractual employees;

d) Pass an order or direction directing the Respondents to absorb and/or regularise the applicants against the posts of Pharmacists, Mohalla Clinic Assistants, and Multi-Tasking Workers in the Ayushman Arogya Mandirs, having regard to their long years of unblemished service rendered since 2016 and their selection through a transparent, merit-based process;

e) Pass an order or direction directing the Respondents to redeploy and adjust those Petitioners who have been rendered without work due to the closure of 31 Mohalla Clinics, by accommodating them in other functioning Mohalla Clinics or Ayushman Arogya Mandirs, in terms of the assurances already extended by the Respondents;

f) Pass such other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice.”

2. The learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants urged to pass a specific order in light of the afore-quoted prayer in the M.A. 2.1 It is the contention of the learned senior counsel that the applicants have been serving continuously and without blemish since 2016, having been recruited through a transparent and merit-based selection process involving written examinations and duly published merit lists. Despite their long and satisfactory service, the respondents have issued a fresh recruitment notification under the newly branded Ayushman Arogya Mandirs, proposing to engage another set of contractual employees for the very same posts, thereby threatening to displace the existing applicants.

2.2 Learned senior counsel further submitted that the impugned recruitment notification, apart from seeking to replace one set of contractual employees with another, also prescribes a new upper age limit of 30 years, which was not part of the eligibility conditions at the time of the initial appointment of applicants. As a result, a large number of applicants who have already rendered over six years of continuous and unblemished service now find themselves age-barred and excluded from participation in the new recruitment process. Even though certain age relaxations have been provided, several applicants remain ineligible, and the notification fails to accord any preference or weightage to their experience.

2.3 Learned senior counsel for the applicants further pointed out that following the filing of the associated Original Application, several Mohalla Clinics have been shut down by the respondents, and many staff members have been orally instructed to sit at home without being redeployed to other functioning clinics, resulting in their loss of livelihood, even though no formal termination orders have been issued.

2.4 Learned senior counsel for the applicants relied upon the well-settled principle of law that one set of contractual employees cannot be replaced by another set