Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Urmila Chauhan vs The Chairman Army Public School on 26 September, 2023
Bench: Hima Kohli, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
SLP (C) No.7994/2022
ITEM NO.34 COURT NO.14 SECTION XIV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7994/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-03-2022
in LPA No. 97/2021 passed by the High Court Of Himachal Pradesh At
Shimla)
URMILA CHAUHAN Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE CHAIRMAN ARMY PUBLIC SCHOOL & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. )
Date : 26-09-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Siddharth Jain, Adv.
Mr. Umang Shankar, AOR
Mr. Sanjay Singh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. L. Narasimha Reddy, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Sagar Saxena, Adv.
Mr. Parmeet Singh, Adv.
Mr. Nikhil Jain, AOR
Ms. Divya Jain, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the court made the following
O R D E R
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment dated 30 th March, 2022, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court Himachal Pradesh Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by GEETA AHUJA Date: 2023.10.04 at Shimla in an appeal1 filed by the respondents whereunder the 17:57:59 IST Reason: 1 Letters Patent Appeal No.97 of 2021 1 SLP (C) No.7994/2022 judgement dated 04th May, 2021, passed by the learned Single Judge in a Writ Petition2 filed by the petitioner directing the respondent-School to regularize her services as a TGT3 upon completion of service of five years on contract basis and reckoning the said date to be 19 th September, 20114 with all consequential benefits has been reversed.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and given our careful consideration to the facts of the instant case. Some of the undisputed facts which we may notice are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the subject post on a temporary basis from 08 th April, 2006 to 31st March, 2007. She was again appointed on a temporary basis from 09th April, 2007 to 31st March, 2008 and from 08th April, 2008 to 31st March, 2009. The petitioner was thereafter appointed on a contractual basis for three years w.e.f. 03rd April, 2009 to 02nd April, 2012, and thereafter from 10th April, 2012 to 09th April, 2015. The contractual service of the petitioner was extended for one year from 17 th April, 2015 to 16th April, 2016 and for another year from 25th April, 2016 to 24th April, 2017.
3. All in all, the petitioner continued to work initially on temporary basis and subsequently on a contractual basis with the respondent-School from 08th April, 2006 to 24th April, 2017. During the subsistence of her contractual appointment, when the petitioner approached the High Court 2 Civil Writ Petition No.480 of 2017 3 Trained Graduate Teacher (Music) 4 The date when Army Welfare Education Society, Vol-I Rules and Regulations for Army Public Schools came into force. 2 SLP (C) No.7994/2022
by filing a writ petition2 seeking regularization of her services on the subject post, that the respondent-School discontinued her services. It is pertinent to note that the writ petition2 was filed by the petitioner on 09th March, 2017 whereas period of her contractual appointment was lastly extended by the respondent-School till 24 th April, 2017. The petitioner continued to serve in the respondent-School on the basis of an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition 2 . The said order continued to enure in favour of the petitioner even after the Learned Single Judge pronounced the judgment2 on 04th May, 2021.
4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent-School did not permit the petitioner to join services during the pendency of the Letters Patent Appeal 1 and subsequently an interim order5 was granted in favour of the respondents staying the operation of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge.
5. On the last date of hearing, we had directed learned counsel for the respondent-School to file a copy of the ACRs of the petitioner till the date she was serving in the School and also indicate as to whether she was considered for regularization afresh.
6. We have perused the documents that have been filed by the respondent-School. Nothing adverse to the petitioner is revealed in the summary of the ACRs for the years 2009-2010 to 2016-2017. In fact, the 5 Dated 30th April, 2021 passed in Civil Miscellaneous Petition No.5222 of 2021 3 SLP (C) No.7994/2022 petitioner was recommended for being appointed as a regular teacher as is apparent from the noting sheets of the respondent – school filed with the additional documents. However subsequently, the Chairman of the respondent-School advised that the matter be put up for consideration later on.
7. We are of the opinion that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is a fit case where the respondent-School ought to reconsider appointing the petitioner on the subject post as a regular teacher. We therefore, direct the Competent Authority of the respondent- School to reconsider the petitioner’s case for regularization to the subject post within six weeks from today, keeping in mind the aspects referred to hereinabove and file an affidavit immediately thereafter.
8. List on 21st November, 2023, at the top of the Board.
(Geeta Ahuja) (Nand Kishor)
Assistant Registrar-cum-PS Court Master (NSH)
4