M.KATJU, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner's appointment dated 14.6.2003 (Annexure -5 to the petition) shows that the petitioner was appointed on Mandeya (Honorarium basis). The Mandeya (Honorarium basis) is a purely contractual appointment which confers the appointee no right as held by a Division Bench decision of this Court in, A/ok Singh v. State' of U.P., 2002 (2/ESC 427. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, before parting this case, we are constrained to observe that a lot of cases are coming before us where we find that appointments have been made on Mandeya (Honorarium basis). The appointment of lecturers in the Degree/P.G Colleges of the State can only be done in accordance with the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980 as amended from time to time, and the rules and regulations made there under. There is no provision in that Act to make an appointment on Mandeya. (Honorarium basis). In fact Section 12 of the Act states "every appointment as a teacher of any college shall be made by the Management in accordance with the provision of this Act and even' appointment made in contravention thereof shall be void". Thus, Section 12 of the Act clearly states that no appointment can be made without complying with the provisions of the Act and any such appointment made in contravention thereof will be totally void ab -initio.
(3.) IT may be mentioned that there was earlier a provision under Section 16 of the Act for making adhoc appointments but that was deleted by the Amendment to the Act of 1992 w.e.f. 22.11.1991. Hence now there is no statutory provision enabling appointments on adhoc basis.;