MEENAKSHI SINGLA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two Letters Patent Appeals No. 1004 of 1990 and 740 of 1990, directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated Feb. 13, 1990, passed in Writ Petition No. 6188 filed by Meenakshi Singla.

(2.) Facts giving rise to these appeals are as follows:-

(3.) Meenakshi Singla was appointed as Junior Lecturer (Chemistry) in Government polytechnic, Bhatinda, on adhoc basis for six months or until a candidate recommended by the Board joined whichever is earlier vide an appointment letter dated Oct. 4, 1985 against general category post. It is not disputed that the petitioner joined immediately on the post of Junior Lecturer in pursuance of the appointment letter and she continued to work on that post even after the expiry of six months. On Sept. 1, 1986, the Government of Punjab issued instruction which have been attached as Annexure P-2, to the writ petition. These instructions directed that services of all adhoc employees to Class III posts who have completed one year service on April 1, 1985, be regularised. In regard to those, who had not completed one year of service, instructions provided that the adhoc employees appointed after April 1, 1984 and had not completed one year of service shall be invited for interview and shall be considered along with other adhoc employees appointed after April 1, 1984 in regard to the vacant post. In regard to the post of Junior Lecturer in Chemistry, Meenakshi Singla was not called for interview and Smt. Pritpal Kaur respondent No. 4 in the writ petition was appointed. Meenakshi Singla consequently filed a writ petition for issue of a direction for quashing the appointment of Pritpal Kaur on the post of Junior Lecturer in Chemistry and also sought the relief that she should not be allowed to join the post and Meenakshi Singla be allowed to continue on the post. This petition came up for hearing before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that in accordance with the instructions issued by the Government of Punjab, the petitioner was entitled to be called for interview but wrongly she was not called for interview. It is also not disputed that initially, vacancy was reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate and respondent No. 4 did not belong to that class but she was one of the Displaced Persons by virtue of 1984 riots. In these circumstances, the learned Single Judge directed that appointment of respondent No. 4 be not quashed as she had already been working on the post for the last three years and directed that Meenaskhi Singla be appointed now on the post of Junior Lecturer in Chemistry but she will not be entitled to the salary for the past period.