S.S. Sandhawalia, J. - (1.) WHETHER an ad hoc employee must complete a minimal one year's continuous service (except for condonable notional breaks) preceding the crucial date of the 31st March, 1977, in order to be considered for the regularisation of his services under the Presidential Order, dated the 3rd of May, 1977. (Annexure P/l) is the primary question which has been debated in these two connected writ petitions.
(2.) IN view of the primarily legal nature of the aforesaid issue, the facts are of no great significance. Nevertheless it becomes necessary to notice those in Civil Writ No. 1039 of 1979 Malkiat Singh v. State of Punjab, to give the adequate background against which the issue has arisen. Malkiat Singh Petitioner joined service as an Art and Craft teacher on a purely ad hoc basis on the 8th of September, 1973. Despite a number of breaks in his service, he claims, to have completed a total of more than one year's service in all by the 31st of March, 1977 and at the material time of presenting the Petitioner, he was posted in the Government Middle School, Nangal Khurd, District Ludhiana. It has been averred on his behalf that the Punjab Services Selection Board was constituted on the 15th of October, 1S74, whilst an Education Department "Recruit ment Committee had been constituted earlier on the 24th of October, 1973, yet on account of delay in making regular appointments through the aforesaid agencies a very large number of employees came to be appointed on an ad hoc basis in almost every Government department. In order to alleviate the hardship which would have been involved in terminating the service of all such ad hoc employees on the appointment of regular incumbents and also in the administrative interest in view of the experience gained by these employees, the President of India (at that time the State of Punjab was under President Rule), promulgated the Order, dated the 3rd of May, 1977, prescribing in great detail the pre -conditions upon which an ad hoc employee's services may be considered for regularization. One of and indeed the primary condition herein was that the ad hoc employee of the specified category must have completed a minima] of one year's service on the 31st of March, 1977 and it was further specified that in calculating this period of service only the specified kinds of breaks in the service may be ignored. The Petitioner claims that having rendered a total of more than one year's service despite breaks therein, he is covered by the Presidential Order and is, therefore, entitled to the regularization of his services. It is then his claim that despite the forwarding of his case by the District Education Officer, Ludhiana to the appropriate authority for the regularization of his services, he nevertheless apprehends to be relieved from his post on the joining of a regular employee. It is averred that though the Petitioner has not been able to get the copy of the orders by which another teacher has been posted in his place, yet being an ad hoc employee, his services can be terminated at any moment without assigning him any notice. Reference and reliance is placed on the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Daljit Singh v. The State, 1978 S.L.R. 32 wherein the validity of the Presidential Order (annexure P/l) was upheld, and also consequential instructions were issued by the State Government, - -vide exhibit P/2. The ultimate relief which the Petitioner claims is that the Respondent - -State, be restrained from terminating his services and in fact seeks a mandamus that the Petitioner's services be regularised in implementation of the Presidential Order. In the return filed on behalf of the Respondents by Pritam Singh, District Education Officer, Ludhiana, it is admitted that the Petitioner originally joined on the 8th of September, 1973 and worked at Government High School, Nathowal till the 19th of December, 1974. Thereafter, he was appointed to another school at village Ranguwal with effect from the 20th of December, 1974 to 8th of May, 1975. He was again appointed in the Government Middle School,, Gaddowal after a break of more than a week on the 15th of May, 1975 where he worked till the 9th of October, 1975 when he was relieved from service. The material and the crucial break, however, was of more than nine months thereafter and it was only on the 21st of July, 1976 that he was appointed afresh. It is, therefore, disputed on behalf of the Respondents that the Petitioner has been in continuous service for a period of more than one year on the 31st of March, 1977. In para No. 4 of the return, it is again highlighted that the Petitioner does not fulfil one of the essential conditions prescribed for the regularisation of his services as the break in his service exceeds the limit of condonation, namely, a notional break upto one month or those for the summer vacations. It is then pointed out that the case of the Petitioner for regularisation was duly considered in the light of the Presidential Order (annexure P/l), but because he did not fulfil the conditions thereof, his case was rejected by the order annexure R/l on the ground that the period of the break in his service far exceeded the condonable and notional breaks upto one month. It has been repeatedly reiterated that the Petitioner does not fulfil the prescribed conditions and does not satisfy the requirement of continuous service from 1st of April, 1976 to 31st of March, 1977 even after ignoring the permissible notional break upto the extent of a month. It has been, however, averred that as yet the services of the Petitioner have not been terminated.
(3.) IN a replication filed on behalf of the Petitioner, the gravamen of the song is that annexure P/l does not require that the continuous service rendered by an employee should be from the 1st of April, 1976 to the 31st of March. 1977, with notional breaks. It is sought to be claimed that even if the fractions of service rendered by an ad hoc employee, despite large breaks total upto more than one year, he would nevertheless be entitled to the benefit and concession accorded by the Presidential Order. Reliance is also sought to be placed on annexure P/4 being a communication from the Chief Secretary, spelling 'out certain guidelines which may be kept in view for the condoning of notional breaks upto one month.;