Can an Employee Serving as ad hoc for Decades seek Regularisation as his Right? HC decides,

 

Read Judgment  

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that an employee serving ad hoc even for long duration cannot seek regularisation as a matter of right per se.

The division-bench comprising of Justice Vibhu Bhakru and Justice Amit Mahajan of the Delhi High court in the case of Desh Deepak Srivastava & ors V Delhi High Court & Ors held that the petitioners who were contractual employees in the Establishment of District Court cannot claim any right to regularization or absorption by the Establishment of Delhi High Court as the two are totally independent and separate Establishments

Brief Facts of the Case ;

The factual matrix of the case is that in the year 2005, the e-Committee of the Supreme Court of India established a National Policy and Action Plan for the Implementation of Information and Communication Technology (referred to as "ICT") in the Indian Judiciary. The Delhi High Court issued an advertisement with the purpose of inviting applications for filling up the positions of “system officer” and “system assistant” to be deployed in the subordinate courts.

It was specifically mentioned that the employment is on a contractual basis for a fixed period of time and is fully funded by the government of India, E- courts mission mode project and are contraminus with the said project. The appointment letters were given to the petitioners expressly stated that the person will not have any entitlement to regular/continuous service as a System Officer and that the services are subject to termination without warning and/or assigning any reason thereof. The petitioner was removed from the service. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted a document to the High Court requesting inclusion in the Court's regular Cadre.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that after establishing the required procedures, the High Courts have absorbed similarly situated workers who received contractual employment under the same policy in other states, including Tripura, Orissa, and West Bengal, Rajasthan, and Chhattisgarh. He relied on the notification issued by the High court of Tripura notification.

The Hon. Supreme Court's e-National Committee's Policy and Action Plan for Implementing ICT in Indian Judiciary also considers integrating the technical staff employed during the construction of e-Courts into the regular Cadre. The petitioners continued by asserting that they completed their term and performed their duties to the best of their abilities.

The learned counsel for the respondent It was contended that the petitioners were hired as System Officers and System Assistants for a set amount of time on a strictly contractual and temporary basis in order to use their services in District Courts. The Joint Registrar (judl) (Rules) and CPC, Delhi High Court terminated their services after the contractually allotted time had passed with a termination
letter dated February 27, 2015, and a corrigendum dated February 28, 2015, since they had no legal basis for requesting absorption. It was also argued that there is no illegality or perversity in terminating the contractual service. At last, it was contended that the National Policy and Action Plan gives permission for skilled labor to be integrated into the system as a necessary component of its Establishment; the word "can" is used, not "must". As a result, it's not necessary for the manpower to be incorporated into its Establishment. Furthermore, no one who has been hired on a temporary basis, under a contract, or on an as-needed basis has a fundamental right to assert that they are entitled to be assimilated into the workforce.

 

High Court's Observation

The court held that the vacancy notice issued by the Delhi High Court for appointment to the post of JJA(T) IN Delhi High court thus has no connection with the petitioners, who were engaged on a contractual basis and were deployed as subordinates court purely on temporary and contractual basis. The writ petition seeking relief of absorption of petitioners and setting aside of vacancy notice issued by the High Court for appointment of JJA(T) is misconceived.

Therefore, find no merit in the present writ petition. The same is dismissed with no orders as to cost.

 

CASE NAME- Desh Deepak Srivastava & ors V Delhi High Court & Ors

CITATION- W.P.(C) No. 9570/2015

CORAM- Justice Vibhu Bhakru and Justice Amit Mahajan 

Social media is bold.

Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free.

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant.

Social media is you.

(With input from news agency language)

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!  

We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure