SONIKA KOHLI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicants in all the above twenty five original applications were appointed as School Teachers by Chandigarh Administration on contract basis for a specific period. In view of the various decisions of the Apex Court, High Court and this Tribunal the contract appointees have been allowed to continue in service till such time they are replaced by the duly selected and appointed teachers in accordance with the provisions of the Chandigarh Education Service (School Cadre) Group 'C' Recruitment Rules, 1991 (for short "School Cadre Rules of 1991"). THE District Education Officer issued an advertisement dated 9th/10th August, 2002 inviting applications for appointment on contract basis with a view to replace the earlier contract appointees. This notification was challenged by another set of contract appointees by filing number of original applications, the leading of which was O.A. No. 126-CH-2002 (Krishan Kumar v. Union Territory Chandigarh and Ors.) decided on 2nd December, 2002. In that case the crucial question which arose for determination was--Whether the teachers appointed on contract basis could be replaced or substituted by a new set of contract appointees?. After taking into consideration the series of decisions of the Apex Court, High Court and this Tribunal and discussing elaborately each one of the respective contentions raised by the parties, the following operative order as contained in Para 28 of the judgment was passed:

(2.) Some of the applicants whose services were likely to be terminated or had been terminated on account of the quashment of the advertisement dated 9th/10th August, 2002, approached this Tribunal to allow them to continue in service or be re-appointed and allowed to continue till such time they are replaced by the teachers recruited in accordance with the rules. They have also projected the grievance that while replacing the contract appointees, the respondent Administration and its functionaries are acting in an arbitrary manner by not following a uniform policy of relieving the teachers on the principle of "last come first go". The action of the respondents in shifting the teachers on transfer from one school to another or directing the teachers to report for duty before the District Education Officer has also been challenged on the ground that transfer/shifting sometimes amounts to relieving the contract appointees for 'good' as they are not allowed to join duties in another school. In some of the original applications, a prayer has been made to declare that the applicants are entitled to the regular scale of pay on the principle of "equal pay for equal work" and that in any case they may be held entitled to minimum of the pay scale as admissible to the regular teachers and no deductions be made for the period of artificial breaks or vacations and the female teachers may further be allowed the benefit of maternity leave.

(3.) THE respondents have filed written statements. THE prayer for regularisation of the services of contract teachers has been resisted tooth and nail. It is maintained that teachers on contract basis have not been appointed by the Competent Authority as per the provisions of the recruitment rules and that the Chandigarh Administration cannot be restrained from recruiting the teachers in accordance with the School Cadre Rules of 1991, as amended from time to time. It is further stated that this Tribunal has held in the case of Krishan Kumar (supra) that all existing contract appointees shall continue to work till they are relived by the duly selected regular teachers appointed in accordance with the rules. In other respects, the stand taken by the respondents is that the contract teachers have already been held entitled to the minimum of the pay scale as admissible to the regular teachers and accordingly salary is being paid to each one of them. THE shifting/transfer of the teachers has been justified on the ground of administrative expediency.