IMPORTANT POINT
The service rendered as a result of ad hoc appointment could not be counted for the purpose of 12 years regular service in the context of Circular No. 6/38/3 PR (FD) - 87 dated 2.6.89 of the Government of Haryana.

Headnote:Haryana Service of Engineers, Class II, Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1970-Rules 6, 8, 9, 11 and 12-Circular No. 6/38/3 PR (FD) -87 dated 2.6.1989-Eligibility for higher pay scale on completion of 12 years regular service-Regular service-Meaning of-Ad hoc/stop gap appointment de hors recruitment rules, whether regular appointment?-Held, No-Services rendered either on ad hoc basis or as a stopgap arrangement cannot be held to be regular service-Such service cannot be counted for earning benefit of higher scale of pay under Circular No. 6/38/3 PR (FD) 87 dated 2.6.89.
Held : Provisions of the Recruitment Rules puts the controversy beyond any doubt and the only conclusion which could be drawn from the aforesaid Rules is that the services rendered either on ad hoc basis or as a stopgap arrangement, as in the case in hand from 1980 to 1982 cannot be held to be regular service for getting the benefits of the revised scale of pay or of the selection grade under the Government Memorandum dated 2nd June, 1989 and 16th May, 1990. The initial letter of appointment dated 6.12.1979 pursuance to which respondent Rakesh Kumar joined as an Assistant Engineer on ad hoc basis in 1980 was also placed before us. The said appointment letter unequivocally indicates that the offer of appointment as Assistant Engineer was on ad hoc basis and Clauses 1 to 4 of the said letter further provides that the appointment will be on ad hoc basis for a period of 6 months from the date of joining and the salary was a fixed salary of Rs. 400/- p.m. in the scale of Rs. 400/- to Rs. 1100/- and the services were liable to be terminated without any notice and at any time without assigning any reason and that the appointment will not enable the appointee any seniority or any other benefit under the Service Rules for the time being in force and will not count towards increment in the time scale. In view of the aforesaid stipulations in the offer of appointment itself we really fail to understand as to how the aforesaid period of service rendered on ad hoc basis can be held to be service on regular basis. The conclusion of the High Court is contrary to the very terms and conditions stipulated in the offer of appointment and, therefore, the same cannot be sustained. The regular letter of appointment dated 29.1.1982 in favour of Rakesh Kumar was also produced before us and that letter indicates that the respondent Rakesh Kumar alongwith others had applied to the Secretary, Haryana Public Service Commission for being appointed as an Assistant Engineer and the Service Commission after selecting the number of persons prepared a list and appointment letters were issued by the Government from the said list on the basis of the merit position of different candidates. Thus the appointment of respondent Rakesh Kumar was a fresh appointment in accordance with the Statutory Rules after the Pubilc Service Commission adjudged their suitability and the regular service of the respondent Rakesh Kumar must be counted from the date he joins the post pursuance to the offer of appointment dated 29.1.1982 and the prior service rendered by him on ad hoc basis cannot be held to be regular service nor can it be tagged on to the later service for earning the benefit under the Government Circular dated 2nd June, 1989 as well as the Clarificatory Circular dated 16th May, 1990. Therefore 12 years period of respondent Rakesh Kumar could be counted from year 1982 for being eligible to get the Selection Grade under the Government Circular dated 2nd June, 1989 as well as clarificatory Circular dated 16th May, 1990. (Paras 7 and 8)

JUDGMENT

Pattanaik, J.-In these batch of appeals, filed by the State of Haryana, the question for consideration is, the services rendered by an ad hoc appointee on the basis of appointment made de hors the Recruitment Rules whether can be counted for earning the benefits of higher scale of pay under the Government Memorandum, such appointees on being regularly appointed in accordance with the Recruitment Rules at a later point of time? Different appeals concern with the appointments made under the different departments of the State of Haryana. In all these appeals the Full Bench decision in Rakesh Kumar s case has been followed and, therefore, we have chosen to deal with the appeal relating to R.K. Singla (Civil Appeal No. 5192 of 1997).

2. Rakesh Kumar Singla filed Civil Writ Petition No. 15301 of 1993, praying for issuance of mandamus to the State of Haryana in the Department of Irrigation and Power as well as to Engineer-in-Chief in Chief Irrigation Department to grant him selection grade in the cadre of Assistant Engineer. It was alleged in the Writ Petition that he joined the post of Assistant Engineer on ad hoc basis on 4.1.80 and later on applied to the Haryana Public Service Commission for being considered for the said post of Assistant Engineer on regular basis in accordance with the Statutory Rules. He was selected by the Haryana Public Service Commission and he was appointed on regular basis with effect from 29.1.1982. He prayed for grant of selection grade on completion of total period of service for 12 years commencing from 4.1.1980 in accordance with the circular of the Government of Haryana dated 2.6.1989. The Government, however, did not grant him the relief sought for and said Shri Singla then approached the High Court by filing the Writ Petition. According to the writ petitioner, since he was duly appointed on being selected by Public Service Commission on 29.1.1982, and prior to that had been appointed as Assistant Engineer on ad hoc basis on 4.1.1980, his continuous service from 1980 should be counted for the purpose of 12 years service, to earn the benefit under the Government Circular dated 2.6.1989 and, therefore, he is entitled to get the selection grade scale with effect from January 1992.

3. The State Government resisted the claim of the respondents by contending, inter alia that the appointment of Rakesh Kumar Singla on 4.1.1980 was purely on ad hoc basis and was not in accordance with the provisions of Recruitment Rules and he got the regular appointment only on 29.1.1982 and, therefore, 12 years period required for getting the benefits under the Government Circular dated 2.6.1989 would count from the said date of 29.1.1982 and not 4.1.1980, as contended by the respondents. The aforesaid Writ Petition was listed before a Division Bench and the Bench was inclined to dismiss the Writ Petition by interpreting the Circular letter dated 2.6.1989 to mean that under the Circular it is only completion of 12 years regular service that would entitle the employee concerned for getting the benefit under the Circular, but since in another case a Coordinate Bench had taken a different view it was thought fit to refer the matter to a larger Bench, and accordingly, the Division Bench passed orders on July 27, 1994 directing that the case be placed before the Chief Justice for constitution of a larger Bench for deciding the issue; "whether the service rendered as a result of ad hoc appointment could be counted for the purpose of 12 years regular service in the context of Circular No. 6/38/3 PR (FD) - 87 dated 2.6.89 of the Government of Haryana". Because of this order the case was placed before three Hon ble Judges of the High Court. Justice Jawahar Lal Gupta on consideration of relevant Circular as well as several other materials on record came to the conclusion that the expression "Regular Service" in the context of circular dated 2nd June, 1989, of the Government of Haryana implies the service rendered by a person a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2000 Supreme(SC) 1544

IMPORTANT POINTThe service rendered as a result of ad hoc appointment could not be counted for the purpose of 12 years regular service in the context of Circular No. 6/38/3 PR (FD) - 87 dated 2.6.89 of the Government of Haryana.

IMPORTANT POINT
The service rendered as a result of ad hoc appointment could not be counted for the purpose of 12 years regular service in the context of Circular No. 6/38/3 PR (FD) - 87 dated 2.6.89 of the Government of Haryana.