- (1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard the Counsel for the parties and perused the records.
(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner as Research Assistant/research Investigator/field Investigator in any of its projects. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed in Govind Ballabh Pant Social Science Institute, Allahabad on the following posts during the periods mentioned against each post on a consolidated salary : The appointment of the petitioner, as stated above, was fully temporary and for a specified. The chart given in paragraph 3 itself shows that the petitioner was engaged in different projects from time to time for a period specified in the above chart.
(3.) IN Jawahar Lal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur (M. P.) v. Bal Krishan Soni and others, (1997) 5 Supreme Court Cases 86, the apex Court has held that the staff employed in a sponsored project cannot be regularized and the posts under project could continue only till the scheme existed. The apex Court in paragraph 3 for the aforesaid judgment has further held that permanent posts cannot be created under the sponsored scheme and are coterminous with the scheme. On abolition of the scheme, the posts are necessarily stand obsolesced and the employees could not be claimed for their regularisation. In State of H. P. through the Secretary Agriculture to the Government of H. P. Shimla v. Nodha Ram and others, 1998 Supreme Court Cases (L and R) 478, the apex Court has held that : "when the project is completed and closed due to non-availability of funds, the employees have go alongwith its closure. The High Court was not right in giving the direction to regularize them or to continue them in other places. No vested right is created in temporary employment. Directions cannot be given to regularize their services in the absence of any existing vacancies nor can directions be given to the State to create posts in a non-existing establishment. The Court should adopt pragmatic approach in giving directions. The directions would amount to creating of posts and continuing them despite non- availability of the work. The directions issued by the High Court are absolutely illegal warranting the Supreme Court's interference. ";