Chhattisgarh High Court: P. Sam Koshy, J. held that protection granted to the petitioner will not preclude the State Government from going in for filling up of the post by way of a regular appointment or by way of engaging contractual teachers under the rules for contractual employment.
The instant petition was filed on the ground that the petitioner was working as a Guest Lecturer under Respondent 3 for the academic session 2020-21; therefore the Respondents should not be permitted to replace him with another contractual Guest Lecturer.
Counsel for petitioner Mr Aman Upadhyay submitted that the petitioner has undergone a due process of selection for being appointed as a Guest Lecturer and that his services also were satisfactory as there is no complaint whatsoever so far as his competency is concerned.
Counsel for respondent Mr Suyash Dhar submitted that it is a case where no cause of action has till date arisen, inasmuch as the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition only on apprehension and since there is no cause of action, the matter is premature and deserves to be dismissed.
The Court observed that the order of appointment specifically had a clause mentioning that the appointments so made are till an alternative arrangement is made by way of regular recruitment/contractual/transfer.
The Court relied on judgment “Manju Gupta v. State of Chhattisgarh”, WPS No. 4406/2016, decided on 27-02-2017 and observed as under
“8. True it is that the Petitioners’ status is that of a Guest Lecturer but that does not mean that they do not have any right. There is always a legitimate expectation of the Petitioners that since the filling up of the posts has not been initiated by way of a regular appointment or by contractual appointments; the Petitioners would be permitted to continue.
- The undisputed fact is that the Petitioners were given appointment only on undertaking given by them pursuant to an advertisement by the Respondents. In the undertaking which was made to be furnished by the Petitioners, they were made to undertake that their appointment would be till the posts are filled up by regular/contractual appointment. This by itself clearly gives an indication that unless the Respondents fill up the sanctioned vacant posts by either regular recruitment or by way of contractual appointment, the Petitioners would continue as Guest Lecturers.”
The court thus held that the court is inclined to accept the same analogy in the present case also and accordingly it is ordered that “unless there is any complaint received against the performance of Petitioner, the Respondents are restrained from going in for any fresh recruitment of a Guest Lecturer under Respondent No.3 College for the subject against which the Petitioner was engaged.”
[Pratik Jain v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2021 SCC OnLine Chh 2418, decided on 12-08-2021]
Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.
