NISHITA MHATRE, J. - (1.) THE challenge in this petition is to the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Circuit at Port Blair in O.A. No.124/A&N/2011. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has dismissed the Original Application filed by the petitioner. The order is a common order passed in O.A. No.43/A&N/2011, O.A. No.122/A&N/2011, O.A. No.123/A&N/2011 and O.A. No.124/A&N/2011.The petitioner has preferred the present petition against the order passed in O.A. No.124/A&N/2011 which was filed by him before the Tribunal.
(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Physical Education Teacher on an ad hoc basis for three months from 1st February, 1999 to 30th April, 1999. He was re-appointed on 9th August, 1999 as a Physical Education Teacher. His appointment was again on ad hoc basis for a period of six months up to 31st January, 2000. The ad hoc appointment was extended for a further period of three months by an order dated 8th February, 2000. Accordingly, the period of the ad hoc appointment was extended up to 30th April, 2000. The petitioner's service was extended on 12th May, 2000 in terms of the Tribunal's order dated 9th February, 2000 in O.A. No.4/A&N/2000 (Suresh Chandra Paul and Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.). This extension was granted up to further orders. There is no dispute that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Physical Education Teacher on the basis of the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee by an order of 11th July, 2003. Applications were invited by the Assistant Director(Education) from those persons who were appointed on ad hoc basis and were working without a break as Teachers, Librarians, Craft Instructors, Laboratory Assistants for regularising the period of such appointment. The Assistant Director (Education) by a communication sent to all Deputy Education Officers requested them to furnish details by 10th April, 2010 of the teaching staff who were initially appointed on ad hoc basis and were in service without any break.
(3.) THE petitioner preferred an application before the Tribunal seeking the relief of continuity of service with effect from 5th February, 1999 when he was appointed on ad hoc basis followed by a regular appointment on 11th July, 2003. The petitioner prayed that three increments be issued to him. The petitioner also sought arrears of pay and other consequential benefits arising out of the grant of such regularisation.;