ANIL BELSARE Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have filed this writ petition alleging that they have been discriminated in the matter of regularization on the post of Sports Officer with effect from the date Rules of Madhya Pradesh Regularization of Ad hoc Appointment Rules, 1986 (for short "Rules of 1986") have been enforced and it is submitted that similarly situated persons have been given the benefit by the Indore Bench of this High Court in WP No.1150/1997 Smt. Pushpa Kekre & Another v. State of MP & Others and therefore the petitioners are also entitled to get the benefit of regularization of their services on the post of Sports Officer in terms of the Rules of 1986. The operative part of the order in the case of Smt. Pushpa Kekre & Another is reproduced as under :-

(2.) Seeking parity, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays that since his clients are similarly placed, therefore, they are also entitled to the same relief as was extended by this High Court in the case of Smt. Pushpa Kekre & Another.

(3.) Brief facts leading to the present petition are that admittedly the petitioners were appointed in the year 1982 on ad hoc basis and they were holding the qualification of Bachelor in Physical Education. In the year 1986, the State Government had promulgated the Rules for regularization of ad hoc employees and these Rules are called M.P. Regularization of Ad hoc Appointment Rules, 1986. Rule 5 of these Rules provides condition for eligibility for regularization and Rule 5 (iii) provides that one of the eligibility for regularization will be possessing requisite qualification prescribed for regular appointment in the existing Recruitment Rules applicable to the post held by them on ad hoc basis. It is also true that the Rules were extended to certain posts as are mentioned in Schedule to the said Rules of 1986. In the Schedule, the posts of Sports Officer and Librarian were not included when the Rules of 1986 were brought into existence. Thereafter, vide amendment dated 28th May, 1987, the posts of Sports Officer and Librarian under Higher Education Department were incorporated in the Schedule. It is also an admitted position that this amendment is prospective. Prior to this amendment on 28th May, 1987, the State Government had amended the Recruitment Rules as were prevailing in the Higher Education Department, namely, M.P. Educational (Collegiate Education) Recruitment Rules of 1967, on 02.01987, i.e., prior to the amendment dated 28th May, 1987. Therefore, in terms of the amended Recruitment Rules of the Collegiate Education Department, the qualification for the post of Sports Officer was prescribed as Master of Physical Education. Therefore, in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 5 (iii) of 1986 Rules, the petitioners were required to possess requisite qualification as was prescribed in the existing Recruitment Rules of the Higher Education Department for regularization of their ad hoc appointment.