Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sanjay Kumar Sharma vs Govt. Of Nctd on 8 July, 2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI
O.A No. 1927/2019 With
M.A No.2101/2019 & 2102/2019
New Delhi, this the 8th day of July, 2019
Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman
Hon'ble Mr. Mohd. Jamshed, Member (A)
1. Sanjay Kumar Sharma
S/o. Mr. Ram Prasad Sharma,
R/o. D-1, Srijan Vihar,
Opp. Aditya Mall, Nyay Khand-2,
Indirapuram, Shipra Sun City,
Ghaziabad, U.P.,
Aged about 43 years,
Working as Assistant Professor at College
Of Art, Department of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
2. Mr. Sanjay Ahluwalia
S/o. Mr. Davinder Ahluwalia
R/o.-24, Anekat Apartments,
Agrasen College Plot No. 23,
Vasundhara Enclava Delhi-110 096,
Aged about 54 years,
Working as Assistant Professor at College
Of Art, Department of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
3. Mr. Subhasish Dutta
S/o. Mr. Ranjan Dutta,
R/o. Kanchari Road, Balurghat,
Dakshin Dinajpur, West Bengal-733101,
Presently at - 2A/52, Vasundhara
Ghaziabad,
Aged about 44 years,
Working as Assistant Professor at College
Of Art, Department of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
4. Mr. Lalit Kumar
S/o. Mr. Jai Pal Singh
R/o. 176-A, (A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H),
Village - Katwaria Sarai,
Aged about 41 years,
Working as Assistant Professor at College
Of Art, Department of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
2
OA No. 1927 of 2019
5. Mr. Abhineet Kumar,
S/o. Mr. Satendra Singh,
R/o. D-50, Third Floor,
West Vinod Nagar, Mandawali,
Fazalpur, East Delhi, Delhi-110 092,
Aged about 33 years,
Working as Assistant Professor at College
Of Art, Department of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
6. Mr. Kosal Kumar
S/o. Mr. N. P. Singh
R/o. S-5, School Block,
Shakarpur, East Delhi, Delhi-110 092.
Aged about 43 years,
Working as Assistant Professor at College
Of Art, Department of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
7. Ranjan Kumar
S/o. Mr. Purusottam Das
R/o. B-35/9, Kishangarh,
Vasantjunj, Delhi, Delhi-110 070.
Aged about 41 years,
Working as Assistant Professor at College
Of Art, Department of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
8. Dr. Sachin Kumar
S/o. Shri Sodan Singh,
Aged about 33 years,
R/o. H. No. 35, Gautam Marg,
Johripur, Delhi-94,
Working as Lecturer (Diploma)
Pharmacognosy, Group - A,
Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research
University,
Directorate of Training and
Technical Education, Delhi.
9. Dr. Shakshi Bajaj
D/o. Shriman Mohan Bajaj,
Aged about 34 years,
R/o. 2690 GF, Outram Lines, GTB Nagar,
Delhi, Working as Lecturer (Diploma) Pharmacognosy,
Group - A, Delhi Pharmaceutical
Sciences and Research University,
Directorate of Training and
Technical Education, New Delhi.
3
OA No. 1927 of 2019
10. Mr. Satish Manchanda
S/o. Shri Subhash Chandra,
Aged about 34 years,
R/o. 4/2350, Street No. 7, Bihari Colony,
Shahdra, Delhi - 32.
Working as Lecturer (Diploma) Pharmacognosy,
Group - A, Delhi Pharmaceutical
Sciences and Research University,
Directorate of Training and
Technical Education, New Delhi.
11. Dr. Himangini
D/o. Shri Radhey Shyam Bansal
Aged about 35 years,
R/o. C-120, Sector-51, Noida,
UP-201 303,
Working as Lecturer (Degree) Pharmachemistry,
Group - A, Delhi Pharmaceutical
Sciences and Research University,
Directorate of Training and
Technical Education, New Delhi.
12. Mr. Mangal Deep Singh,
S/o. Shri Om Prakash Singh,
Aged about 31 years,
R/o. 472/5A Govind Puri, Kalkaji,
New Delhi- 110 019,
Working Lecturer-Mechanical Engineering,
Group - A, G B Pant Institute of
Technology, New Delhi,
Directorate of Training and
Technical Education, New Delhi.
13. Mr. Anubhav Sharma
S/o. Mr. Ramesh Chandra Sharma,
Aged about 32 years,
R/o. 40, Shyam Nagar, Okhla Phase-3,
New Delhi-110 020,
Working Lecturer-Mechanical Engineering,
Group - A, G B Pant Institute of
Technology, New Delhi,
Directorate of Training and
Technical Education, New Delhi.
14. Mr. Satya Prakash Gautam
S/o. Late Arjun Kumar Gautam
Aged about 34 years,
R/o. 163, Sarai Julena, New Delhi-110 025,
Working Lecturer-Mechanical Engineering,
Group - A, G B Pant Institute of
4
OA No. 1927 of 2019
Technology, New Delhi,
Directorate of Training and
Technical Education,
New Delhi. ...Applicants
(By Advocate : Mr. Jaideep Singh, Ms. Eysha Marysha, Mr.
Kartik Dabas and Ms. Disha Sachdeva)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi through Chief Secretary,
Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Extension,
Delhi.
2. Secretary, Directorate of Training and Technical
Education, Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
Muni Maya Ram,
Marg, Pitampura, New Delhi-110 088,
Through its Principal Secretary
3. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board,
Through its Chairman, Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
F-18, Karkardooma, Institutional Area,
Delhi-92. ...Respondents
O R D E R (O R A L)
Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman :
The applicants were appointed as contractual Assistant Professors in the Government of NCT of Delhi. The Department of Training and Technical Education issued an advertisement for Walk-In-Interview for appointment on contractual basis in the Delhi Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research in the year 2010. The applicants state that they responded to the said advertisement and on the basis of their participation therein, appointments were made on contractual basis in different categories, for a period of one year, between 2010 and 2012. Similar 5 OA No. 1927 of 2019 advertisement is said to have been issued subsequently.
2. The applicants contend that they were appointed on contractual basis as Lecturers several years ago and in the light of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Delhi High Court, GNCTD passed an order dated 19.10.2015 and formulating a policy to regularise the contractual employees, which provided, inter alia for relaxation of age limits and giving weightage to experience, as and when the regular selections take place. The applicant filed this O.A with a prayer to direct the respondents :-
"(a) to initiate the process of regularisation of their services in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Sachin Ambadas Vs. State of Maharashtra and Judgment of Delhi High Court in Sonia Gandhi and Ors. Vs. Government of NCT of Delhi.
(b) To direct the respondents to provide shape and finality to the legislative intent of the Delhi Government to regularise all the contractual employees ; and
(c) to set aside the order dated 19.10.2015 passed by the Delhi Government.
Another relief claimed by the applicants is to direct the respondents not to indulge in the practice of hire and fire.
3. The applicants state that they have been subjected to the process of selection and that the respondents are under obligation to treat them as having been appointed on regular basis. It is stated that whatever may have been the circumstances under which the appointments were made, with the passage of time, the applicants have gained 6 OA No. 1927 of 2019 experience and they deserve to be regularised. It is stated that they stand on the same footing as the parties to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Sachin Ambadas Dawale Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. in Writ Petition No. 2046/2010 decided on 19.10.2013 and that of the Delhi High Court in Sonia Gandhi & Ors. Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. in W.P. (C) No. 6798/2002 decided on 06.11.2013.
4. We heard Mr. Jaideep Singh, learned counsel for applicants. He reiterated various contentions in the O.A. Apart from that, he argued that it would be unfair on the part of the government to subject the applicants to selection process. It is also his case that refusal to take into account, the services put up by the applicants for regularisation would result in sheer waste of human resources.
5. For one reason or the other, the Government and their agencies have been taking recourse to the process of appointment of employees on contractual basis even against the regular vacancies. Time and again, such employees naturally pressed for regularisation, on completion of certain length of service. This aspect was dealt in detail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka And Ors. vs. Umadevi And Others, 7 OA No. 1927 of 2019 2006(4) SCC 1. It was directed that under no circumstances, the appointments made otherwise than through the regular selection process, shall be considered equivalent to the employees who were appointed on regular basis. As a onetime measure, it directed that contractual employees who have completed 10 years of service by the date of judgment, may be subjected to the regular process of selection, if necessary by providing certain relaxations. The Hon'ble Supreme Court did not direct regularisation of any contractual employee, straightway, whatever be the length of such contractual engagement.
6. In Sachin Ambadas Vs. State of Maharashtra, (supra), the plea of the petitioners before the Bombay High Court was that they have been subjected to the regular process of selection and composition of the selection committee was similar to the one provided under the relevant rules. It is not in the instant case.
7. In Sonia Gandhi's case (supra) the Hon'ble Delhi High Court was dealing with Para Medical Employees of Hospitals. It was observed that there should not be exploitation for years together. It was directed that the government shall formulate a policy for regularisation of the employees by framing guidelines.
8OA No. 1927 of 2019
8. Obviously, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uma Devi's case and subsequent judgment of Delhi High Court, the GNCTD passed an order dated 19.10.2015 and it reads as under :-
"No.F.19(11)/2015/S.IV/1896-96 Dated : 19.10.15 ORDER The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi has considered the issue of regularisation of the Contractual employees working in various departments of Govt. Of N. C. T. of Delhi and approved the following general policy for regularisation of the contractual employees vide Cabinet Decision Bo. 2223 dated 06.10.2015 :-
In line with the Uma Devi Judgment, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi makes the following policy for contractual employees working against regular posts :-
1. Every department should formulate a scheme to fill up all vacant posts.
2. Contractual employees working against these posts should be allowed to apply with following conditions :-
(a) They should be given age relaxation.
(b) They should be given appropriate and adequate weightage of experience for that post in evaluation.
(c) Any contractual employee, whose service was terminated due to unsatisfactory work during their contractual employment, shall be treated as ineligible, under the scheme.
3. Policy in para-2 shall also be applicable to the contractual employees who have worked against these posts for an aggregate period of 6 months or more after 01.04.2013.
It is, therefore, requested that the necessary action with regard to implementation of above decisions may be initiated at the earliest."
9. A perusal of the same discloses that it provides for relaxation of the age limit and giving of weightage to the employees working on contractual basis as and when 9 OA No. 1927 of 2019 regular selection process takes place. One cannot expect a better scheme than this. It should not be forgotten that in every field there are highly qualified persons and scholars, who are prepared to undergo the selection process and even while they are kept aside, the contractual appointments are made, just on the basis of Walk-In- Interview, without there being an occasion to assess merit, with the participation of eligible candidates.
10. Though the Hon'ble Supreme Court denounced such practices, uncertainty still prevails. The law, as it stands now, is that one contractual employee cannot be replaced with another contractual employee and even where the regular appointments take place, those who work on contractual basis, shall be permitted to take part therein by extending certain relaxation. Beyond that, the question of regularisation of an employee, straightaway appointed on contractual basis, without being subjected to selection process, does not arise.
11. Added to that, in the order of appointment it was made amply clear as under :-
"The engagement shall be strictly on contractual basis only and the employees will not claim regularisation of service on the basis of this contract."
12. The Advertisement also made this aspect clear and it reads as under :-
10OA No. 1927 of 2019
"The walk-in-interview for the following posts of College of Art, 20-22, Tilak Marg, New Delhi will be held at premises of College of Art, New Delhi as per schedule mentioned against the discipline. The appointment will be on contract basis for a period of one year or till such time the post is filled on regular basis through UPSC, whichever is earlier. Time of interview : from 10.00 am onwards on 10.08.2010.
S. Discipline Name of Total No. of Date of
No. Post No. of Posts Interview
vacant Reserved
posts
1. Applied Professor 2 Gen-2 10.08.2010
Art Assistant 4 Gen-2,
Professor OBC-1,
SC-1
Lecturer 6 Gen-4,
OBC-1,
SC-1
2. Painting Professor 2 Gen-2, 10.08.2010
OBC-1
Assistant 2 Gen-2
Professor
Lecturer 2 Gen-1,
SC-1
3. Sculpture Professor 1 Gen-1 10.08.2010
Assistant
Professor
Lecturer 3 Gen-2,
OBC-1
Note : Payment of consolidated remuneration to the contract appointed faculty will based on minimum of the scale of pay (as per AICTE pre revised pay scales) plus Allowances without HRA. However, for Retired Persons, if appointed, Govt. guidelines regarding last pay drawn minus pension will be made applicable. Appointment to above posts is purely a stop gap arrangement and will be for a period of one year or till such time the post is filled on regular basis through UPSC whichever is earlier. No other financial allowances/facilities exist for contractual appointee. Retired persons below the age of 65 years may also apply. Number of posts may vary without further notification."
13. It also needs to be mentioned that not only the eligible candidates but also the retired employees beyond the age of 65 years were permitted to appear. Absolutely no reference is made to the recruitment rules or to the stipulations made therein. When this is the method of 11 OA No. 1927 of 2019 employment, we find it difficult to accede to the prayer of the applicants. The UPSC is the agency conferred with the power to select candidates for such post. Admittedly, the applicants were not selected by the UPSC.
14. Further, the policy framed by the Government with a view to provide relief to various contractual employees in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, cannot be found fault with.
15. We do not find any merit in the O.A. Accordingly, the O.A is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Mohd. Jamshed) (Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) Member (A) Chairman /Mbt/