GOPAL SINGH GUSAIN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2012-7-50
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 31,2012

Gopal Singh Gusain Appellant
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand and others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Tarun Agarwala, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Pankaj Purohit, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Lalit Miglani, the learned brief holder for the respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Peon on 31.01.1985 in Government District Library, Chamoli at Gopeshwar. The petitioner contends that he is a graduate and also possesses a Diploma in Library Science and is qualified to be appointed as a Library Clerk. Notwithstanding the aforesaid qualification, one Ramakant Bainjwal was appointed as a Librarian on ad hoc basis and, accordingly, the post on which Ramakant Bainjwal was working as a Library Clerk fell vacant. Accordingly, the District Education Officer, Chamoli issued an order dated 31st July, 2006 appointing the petitioner as a Library Clerk in the pay -scale of Rs. 950 -1500. Pursuant to this order, the petitioner started working as a Library Clerk and is working continuously since then without any break in service and is receiving the salary of a Library Clerk with necessary increments and other benefits available on that post. The petitioner made a representation for regularization of his services on the post of Library Clerk. This court, by an order of 22nd April, 2008 passed in Writ Petition No. 752 of 2002 (S/B) titled as "Gopal Singh Gusain Vs. State of Uttaranchal", directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization under the Rules of 2002. Based on the said direction, the impugned order was passed by the respondents rejecting the claim of the petitioner for regularization on the post of Library Clerk on the ground that the petitioner was appointed as a Library Clerk as a stopgap -arrangement and was not given an ad hoc appointment and, therefore, the petitioner is not eligible under for regularization under the Uttaranchal Regularization of Ad -hoc Appointments (On posts Outside the Purview of the Public Service Commission) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 2002). The petitioner, being aggrieved, has filed the present writ petition. The respondents in their counter affidavit have reiterated the contention as disclosed in the impugned order, namely, that the petitioner was posted as a Library Clerk on a stop -gap -arrangement and was not given an ad hoc appointment. The petitioner has filed the appointment letter, which indicates that the petitioner was appointed as a Library Clerk on a purely temporary basis, but was given a pay scale of Rs. 950 -1500 which is the payscale of the post of the Library Clerk.
(3.) RULE 4 of the Rules of 2002 provides the procedure for regularization. For facility, the said provision is extracted hereunder: - 4. Regularization of ad -hoc appointments. - - (1) Any person who - - (i) was directly appointed on ad -hoc basis before June 30, 1998 and is continuing the service on the date of commencement of these rules; (ii) possessed requisite qualifications prescribed for regular appointment at the time of ad hoc appointment; and (iii) has completed or as the case may be, after he has completed three years service as such, shall be considered for regular appointment in permanent or temporary vacancy, as may be available, on the basis of his record and suitability before any regular appointment is made in such vacancy in accordance with the relevant rules or orders. (2) In making regular appointments under these rules, reservations for the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes and other categories shall be made in accordance with the orders of the Government in force at the time of recruitment. (3) For the purpose of sub -rule (1) the appointing authority shall constitute a Selection Committee. (4) The appointing authority shall prepare an eligibility list of the candidates arranged in order of seniority, as determined from the date of order of appointment and if two or more persons are appointed together from the order in which their names are arranged in the said appointment order, the list shall be placed before the Selection Committee alongwith the character rolls and such other records of the candidates as may be considered necessary to assess their suitability.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.