Lalita Bohra vs State of Uttarakhand & Others

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

On the basis of the Government Order dated 28.09.2004, State granted permission for appointment of 100 Guest Teachers, on contract basis on a

consolidated honorarium. The petitioner was appointed for academic year 2005-06. The said arrangement continued and Principal of Government

Polytechnic, Kotabagh, issued advertisement for appointment on contract basis for the academic year 2006-07, on 07.11.2006, petitioner since being

qualified, she applied and was appointed. Even for the academic year 2007-08 also an identical advertisement was issued on 22.07.2017 and the

petitioner appointment continued.

Ultimately, Secretary Technical Education issued an order dated 03.11.2008 sanctioned-190 posts of Lecturer, 101 posts of Workshop Instructor

and 26 posts of Computer Operation be appointed on contract basis. It provided that these appointment on sanctioned post will be as per reservation

policy and as per prescribed qualification, this arrangement is subject to regular appointment being made by Public Service Commission. The State by

various instructions continued this arrangement eg. Letters dated 26.08.2009; 14.04.2010; 05.10.2009; 31.12.2009 henceforth. This was further

extended by Director for academic years 2010-11; 2011-12; 2012-13; 2013-14 by his letters dated 31.05.2010; 25.02.2011; July 2013.

The petitioner has come up with the case that she was appointed as a Computer Programmer, though on a contractual basis, as back as in 2005 and

working regularly. She submits that she has been working regularly against a vacant substantive post available in the Government Women Polytechnic

Kotabagh (Nainital). Her further submission is that after the enforcement of regularization rules on 30.12.2013 she has become entitled to be

considered for regularization as was fulfilling all the conditions contemplated thereon, and she has been consistently pursuing and looking to the

services rendered by the petitioner and the fact that her appointment happens to be against a substantive post, though on a contractual basis, her claim

for regularization may be considered on the post of Computer Programmer-cum-Operator.

She further in support of her contention submits that she is requisitely qualified to hold the post on which she is claiming for her regularization.

It is also the case of the petitioner that the claim of regularization as made by the petitioner and such other Computer Programmers were also

favourably forwarded by the Director by his letter dated 11.09.2015, whereby, certain exercise was required to be undertaken by the Principals of

various Government Polytechnics for considering regularization, though till date no finality has been given to the regularization of the service of the

petitioner.

The petitioner in paragraph-17 of the Writ Petition has specifically pleaded that under the annual transfer policy, which is being undertaken, there is

an order of transfer passed on 08.06.2018 by virtue of which one Smt. Preeti Arya (Computer Programmer) has been sought to be transferred from

the Government Polytechnic, Tanakpur, Champawat to Government Polytechnic, Kotabagh (Nainital), where the petitioner is working in the said

capacity on contractual basis since 2005.

The apprehension which is being expressed by the petitioner is that if as a result of joining of Smt. Preeti Arya as a Computer Programmer, in all

probability, her services may be relieved and consequent thereto once her services are relieved then under the regularization rules of 2013 she may not

be considered for a regularization because the principal condition for considering the regularization is that the incumbent ought to be in services in

whatever status necessary under the rules for regularization.

Without venturing into the merits of the matter at this stage and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is qualified and working as a

Computer Programmer on contractual basis since 2005, it is clarified that the joining of Smt. Preeti Arya as a Computer Programmer in pursuance to

the order of transfer dated 08.06.2018 will not have any adverse effect on the consideration of claim of regularization of the petitioner based on the

recommendation of Dire0ctor dated 11.09.2015, that has to be taken independently by the respondent within a period of two months from today and, in

the meantime, the status of the petitioner’s functioning as on a contractual basis since 2004 will be continued to be maintained till next date of

listing.

Respondent nos. 1 to 3 are directed to file counter affidavit within a period of four weeks from today.

List thereafter.