Pattanaik, J. - (1.) In these batch of appeals, filed by the State of Haryana, the question for consideration is, the services rendered by an ad hoc appointee on the basis of appointment made dehors the Recruitment Rules whether can be counted for earning the benefits of higher scale of pay under the Government Memorandum, such appointees on being regularly appointed in accordance with the Recruitment Rules at a later point of time Different appeals concern with the appointments made under the different departments of the State of Haryana. In all these appeals the Full Bench decision in Rakesh Kumar's case has been followed and, therefore, we have chosen to deal with the appeal relating to R. K. Singla (Civil Appeal No. 5192 of 1997).
(2.) Rakesh Kumar Singla filed Civil Writ Petition No. 15031 of 1993, praying for issuance of mandamus to the State of Haryana in the Department of Irrigation and Power as well as to Engineer-in-Chief in Chief (sic) Irrigation Department to grant him selection grade in the cadre of Assistant Engineer. It was alleged in the Writ Petition that he joined the post of Assistant Engineer on ad hoc basis on 4-1-1980 and later on applied to the Haryana Public Service Commission for being considered for the said post of Assistant Engineer on regular basis in accordance with the Statutory Rules. He was selected by the Haryana Public Service Commission and he was appointed on regular basis with effect from 29-1-1982. He prayed for grant of selection grade on completion of total period of service for 12 years commencing from 4-1-1980 in accordance with the circular of the Government of Haryana dated 2-6-1989. The Government, however, did not grant him the relief sought for and said Shri Singla then approached the High Court by filing the Writ Petition. According to the Writ Petitioner, since he was duly appointed on being selected by Public Service Commission on 29-1-1982, and prior to that had been appointed as Assistant Engineer on ad hoc basis on 4-1-1980, his continuous service from 1980 should be counted for the purpose of 12 years service, to earn the benefit under the Government Circular dated 2-6-1989 and, therefore, he is entitled to get the selection grade scale with effect from January 1992.
(3.) The State Government resisted the claim of the respondents by contending, inter alia that the appointment of Rakesh Kumar Singla on 4-1-1980 was purely on ad hoc basis and was not in accordance with the provisions of Recruitment Rules and he got the regular appointment only on 29-1-1982 and, therefore, 12 years period required for getting the benefits under the Government Circular dated 2-6-1989 would count from the said date of 29-1-1982 and not 4-1-1980, as contended by the respondents. The aforesaid Writ Petition was listed before a Division Bench and the Bench was inclined to dismiss the Writ Petition by interpreting the Circular letter dated 2-6-1989 to mean that under the Circular it is only completion of 12 years regular service that would entitle the employee concerned for getting the benefit under the Circular, but since in another case a Coordinate Bench had taken a different view it was thought fit to refer the matter to a larger Bench, and accordingly, the Division Bench passed orders on July 27, 1994 directing that the case be placed before the Chief Justice for constitution of a larger Bench for deciding the issue; "whether the service rendered as a result of ad hoc appointment could be counted for the purpose of 12 years regular service in the context of Circular No. 6/38/3 PR (FD) - 87 dated 2-6-89 of the Government of Haryana". Because of this order the case was placed before three Hon'ble Judges of the High Court. Justice Jawahar Lal Gupta on consideration of relevant Circular as well as several other materials on record came to the conclusion that the expression "Regular Service" in the context of circular dated 2nd June, 1989, of the Government of Haryana implies the service rendered by a person after the appointment in accordance with the Rules governing the recruitment to the post and the service rendered by a person on ad hoc basis or otherwise, which is not in conformity with the Rules cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining his seniority nor can it be taken into consideration for the purpose of computing the prescribed period of service under the Circular. The learned Judge, therefore, answered the reference against the employee. The majority view, however, was expressed by Hon'ble Sethi, J. (as he then was), who came to the conclusion that if the initial appointment is made following the procedure laid down by the Rules and the appointee continues on the post uninterruptedly till the regularisation of the service in accordance with the Rules then his period of ad hoc service shall be counted for the purpose of seniority and necessarily therefore such period would also enure to the benefit of the employee for computation of the period of 12 years of regular service under the Circular dated 2-6-1989. The learned Judge was of the opinion that on reading the Circular dated 2-6-1989 it cannot be held that the intention of the Government was to deprive the claim of civil servants who are otherwise entitled to the benefit of ad hoc service for the purpose of the higher scale of pay on completion of 12 years service under the Circular dated 2-6-1989. On this conclusion the majority judgment allowed the claim of the Writ Petitioner R. K. Singla.;