Rattan Lal & Orsetc. Vs. State of
Haryana & Ors [1985] INSC 178 (16 August 1985)
VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) VENKATARAMIAH, E.S.
(J) MISRA, R.B. (J)
CITATION: 1987 AIR 478 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 569
1985 SCC (4) 43 1985 SCALE (2)354
CITATOR INFO: RF 1991 SC1286 (5)
ACT:
Constitution of India 1950, Articles 14 and
16 - State Government - Appointment of 'ad hoc' teachers in regular vacancies -
Validity and legality of.
HEADNOTE:
On the question whether it is open to the
State Government to appoint teachers on an ad-hoc basis at the commencement of
an academic year and terminate their services before the commencement of the
next summer vacation, or earlier, to appoint them again on an ad-hoc basis at
the commencement of next academic year and to terminate their services before
the commencement of the succeeding summer vacation or earlier and to continue
to do 80 year after year.
^
HELD: 1. The policy of "ad-hocism"
followed by the State Government in the appointment of teachers for quite a
long period has led to the breach of Articles 14 ant 16 of the Constitution.
Such a situation cannot be permitted to last any longer. The State Government
is expected to function as a motel employer. [571 E] In the instant case the
State Government is directed to take immediate steps to fill up in accordance
with the relevant rules the vacancies in which those who are appointed on an
at-hoc basis are now working ant to allow all those who are now holding these
posts on an at-hoc basis to remain in those posts till the vacancies are duly
fillet up. These at-hoc teachers shall be paid salary ant allowances for the
period of summer vacation as long as they held office. Those who are entitled
to maternity or medical leave, shall also be granted such leave in accordance
with the rules.[571 F, 572 A-B]
2. The State Government has a duty to appoint
teachers in existing vacancies in accordance with the rules. The State
Government has failed to discharge that duty. A substantial number of ad-hoc
appointments are mate in the existing vacancies which have remained unfilled
for three to four years. In some cases the appointments are made for a period
of six months only and they are renewed after a break of a few days. [571 A-Bl
570 The number of teachers in the State who are appointed on such ad-hoc basis
is very large indeed. If the teachers had been appointed regularly, they would
have been entitled to the benefits of summer vacation along with the salary and
allowances payable in respect of that period and to all other privileges such as
casual leave medical leave, maternity leave etc. available to all the
Government servants. These benefits are denied to these ad-hoc teachers
unreasonably on account of this pernicious system of appointment adopted by the
State Government. [571 B-C]
3. These teachers who constitute the bulk of
the educated unemployed are compelled to accept these jobs on an ad-hoc basis
with miserable conditions of service. The Government appears to be exploiting
this situation. This is not a sound personnel policy. It is bound to have
serious repercussions on the educational Institutions and the children studying
there. [571 D]
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petitions Nos.
4600,4600A of 1985 etc.
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of
India.) Rishi Kumar, S.M. Ashri, Naunit Lal, Kailash Vasdev, Mrs. Vinod Arya,
R.C. Pathak, Vishnu Mathur, Mahabir Singh, Pankaj Kalra, Serva Mitter, R.P.
Singh, K.C. Dua, N.D. Garg, S. Srinivasan, Rathin Dass, K.K. Gupta, S.K. Bagga,
R.
Ramachandran S.K. Bisaria, Laxmi Arvind, K.P.
Gupta, R. Bana, Ranbir Singh Yadav, H.M. Singh, Mrs. S.C.Jindal, R.K. Agnihotri,
B.S. Gupta, P.C. Kapur, Kripal Singh and Amlan Ghosh for the Petitioners.
V.C. Mahajan, I.S. Goel, C.V. Subba Rao and
R.N. Poddar for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
VENTAKARAMIAH, J. In all these petitions the common question which arises for
decision is whether it is open to the State Government to appoint teachers on
an ad-hoc basis at the commencement of an academic year and terminate their
services before the commencement of the next s = r vacation or earlier to
appoint them again on an ad-hoc basis at the commencement of next academic year
and to terminate their services before the commencement of the succeeding
summer vacation or earlier and to continue to do so year after year. A
substantial number of such ad-hoc appointments are made in the existing
vacancies which have 571 remained unfilled for three to four years. It is the
duty of the State Government to take steps to appoint teachers in those vacancies
in accordance with the rules as early as possible. The State Government of
Haryana has failed to discharge that duty in these cases. It has been
appointing teachers for quite some time on an ad-hoc basis for short periods as
stated above without any justifiable reason. In some cases the appointments are
made for a period of six months only and they are renewed after a break of a
few days. The number of teachers in the State of Haryana who are thus appointed
on such ad-hoc basis is very large indeed. If the teachers had been appointed
regularly they would have been entitled to the benefits of summer vacation
along with the salary and allowance payable in respect of that period and to
all other privileges such as casual leave, medical leave, maternity leave etc.
available to all the Government servants. These benefits are denied to these
ad-hoc teachers unreasonably on account of this pernicious system of
appointment adopted by the State Government. These ad-hoc teachers are
unnecessarily subjected to an arbitrary 'hiring and firing' policy. These
teachers who constitute the bulk of the educated unemployed are compelled to
accept these jobs on an ad-hoc basis with miserable conditions of service. The
government appears to be exploiting this situation. This is not a sound
personnel policy. It is bound to have serious repercussions on the educational
institutions and the children studying there. The policy of 'ad-hocism'
followed by the State Government for a long period has led to the breach of
Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution. Such a situation cannot be
permitted to last any longer. It is needless to say that the State Government
is expected to function as a model employer.
We, therefore, direct the State Government to
take immediate steps to fill up in accordance with the relevant rules the
vacanies in which those who are appointed on an ad-hoc basis are now working
and to allow all those who are now holding these posts on ad-hoc basis to
remain in those posts till the vacancies are duly filled up. The teachers who
are now working on such ad-hoc basis if they have the prescribed qualification
may also apply for being appointed regularly in those posts. The State
Government may also consider sympathetically the question of relaxing the qualification
of maximum age prescribed for appointment to those posts in the case of those
who have been victims of this system of 'ad-hoc' appointments. If any of the
petitioners in these petitions has under any existing rule acquired the right
to be treated as a regularly appointed teacher, his case shall be considered by
the State Government and an appropriate order may be passed in his case.
572 We strongly deprecate the policy of the
State Government under which 'ad-hoc' teachers are denied the salary and allowances
for the period of the summer vacation by resorting to the fictional breaks of
the type referred to above. These 'ad-hoc' teachers shall be paid salary and
allowances for the period of summer vacation as long as they hold the office
under this order. Those who are entitled to maternity or medical leave, shall
also be granted such leave in accordance with the rules.
If the petitioners have any other grievances,
they may approach the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
These petitions are accordingly disposed of.
A.P.J. Petition dismissed.
Back
