Employee Appointed On Contractual Basis Without Public Advertisement Does Not Have “Right To Regularization”: Punjab and Haryana Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of Punjab and Haryana states that employees who are contracted contractors without any advertising and contrary to the provisions of Sections 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, have no right to be authorized.
The bench comprising Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal therefore dismissed the petition filed by the applicant, appointed by the Respondent as a driver for three months. His services were extended beyond that but the services were terminated by an order which was challenged by the applicant claiming he was given the same pass without giving him a chance to be heard.
After considering the arguments of the opposing parties, the court came to the conclusion that the applicant’s appointment was contracted only because there was no written record of his appointment in response to the advertisement or in accordance with the rules.
The applicant was appointed as Driver on 25.08.1999 by contract for a period of three months. Later, his services were extended. However, by order of 14.11.2003 (Appendix P-8), his services were terminated. There is no indication that the applicant was appointed in response to the advertisement or in accordance with the rules. The appointment was for contract only. The court relied on the Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board case against Ranjodh Singh and others as well as the Accounts Officer (A&I) APSRTC and others against K.V. Ramana and others there were considered to be contracted contract workers without any advertisement and contrary to the provisions of Sections 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India have no right to be authorized. For the above reasons, the court dismissed the complaint as unfounded.
Title of the case: Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab & Others