JUDGEMENT

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J. FACTUAL MATRIX

1. The petitioners in the present batch of petitions were employed in various capacities as administrative and technical staff with the respondent („respondent Institute‟ hereinafter) between the period ranging from the year 1998 to 2010 and all the petitioners have completed at least 10 years of service with the respondent Institute.

2. The respondent Institute is a body established in the year 1965 and registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act No. XXI of 1860 (Punjab Amendment Act, 1957) („the Act‟ hereinafter) as extended to Delhi. The respondent Institute is dedicated to objective research and policy relevant studies on all aspects of defense and security with a mission to promote national and international security through generation and dissemination of knowledge on defense and security related issues.

3. In the year 2021, the petitioners collectively served a legal notice dated 9th March, 2021 to the respondent Institute seeking regularization of their services as they have worked for almost 10 years, however, the respondent Institute did not reply to the same.

4. Thereafter, the petitioners filed the instant petitions seeking regularization of their services.

5. Since the factual matrix of both the petitions are similar in nature, this Court has deemed it appropriate to rely upon the pleadings stated in the W.P. (C) No. 5864/2021 for convenience of the stakeholders. PLEADINGS BEFORE THIS COURT

6. The petitioner filed a brief synopsis summarizing the arguments regarding the maintainability of the petition. The same reads as under:

―The present petition has been filed by 19 administrative employees of the respondent institute which has a total sanctioned posts of 52 with 44 filled up out of which only 03 as permanent, the rest ―on contract‖ for 28-14 years who are seeking regularisation which is being opposed on two grounds:

A. The respondent is not an instrumentality of the state. B. Their initial appointments were temporary. Whether the Respondent is an Instrumentality of the State:

(i)The respondent was conceived as an inter-services organisation under the Ministry of Defence as clearly reflected in the Annual reports of the respondent for the period 1968-69 and 69-70.

(ii) While notifying the establishment of Department of Military Affairs (DMA) under government of India (Allocation of Business) Three Hundred and Fifty Third Amendment Rules, 2019, vide Gazette notification dated 30.12.2019, it was ordered ―After entry 20, following entry shall be inserted, namely:- ―21.

Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis, National Defence College and any other organization within the Ministry of Defence whose remit is broader than military matters.‖

(Annex-4 page 94 – 96).

(iii)Respondent is covered under the RTI Act, 2005.

(iv)The Respondent was originally named IDSA and has been rechristened as MPIDSA through a press note by the Ministry of Defence.

(v)Respondent is fully funded by the Ministry of Defence.

(vi)The Joint Secretary (Planning and International C-operation Division– PIC), Department of Defence under the Ministry of Defence is the Division in-charge in matters pertaining to the respondent.

(vii)The President of the respondent has to be the incumbent Defence Minster. The Defence Secretary and Foreign Secretary are the ex-officio members of the governing body of the society.

(viii)The Director General, Chief Executive officer of the respondent appointed exclusively by the Appointments Committee of Cabinet only.

(ix)The is headed by either serving or retired government officials.

(x)Campus of the Respondent, institutional and residential, has been built by DRDO on defence land inside Delhi Cantonment.

(xi)The service conditions of the employees are covered under the Central Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal), Rules.

(xii)Reservation Policies of the GOI are applicable to the Respondent.

(xiii)Employees are being paid on