Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents it has been stated that Chandigarh Administration in consultation with the Finance Department vide Memo No.13/1-56-IH(10)-2009/18313 dated 18.09.2009 created 20 new posts of various categories on contract basis with the approval of Administrator, UT, Chandigarh (Annexure R-1). 02 posts of Clerk were included in this number. The applicant was appointed as Clerk on contract basis initially for a period of six months as per terms and conditions mentioned in the appointment letter dated 05.02.2010 (Annexure A-1). It was made clear in this letter that the applicant was appointed on contract basis and not against a regular sanctioned post. The posts against which the applicant is seeking regularization were not even created at that time when the applicant was appointed on contract basis. Hence the post on which the applicant joined on contract basis has no relevance with the post advertised on 13.07.2013 by Cdac Mohali. The post on which the applicant joined was created out of student fund as a stop gap arrangement.

5. The Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, conveyed the approval of Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, to the creation of 31 posts (16 faculty and 15 non-faculty) in the Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology, Chandigarh vide letter dated 04.08.2010, out of which 5 posts of Clerk have been advertised by the Cdac Mohali (Annexure R-II). It is further stated that Uma Devi (Supra) is not relevant to the matter as this judgment relates to persons serving the Government Departments in 2006 and earlier while the applicant only joined as a contract employee in 2010. The applicant had availed opportunity to compete with other candidates to the post of Clerk on regular basis but she had failed to qualify the written test held in July 2010. The respondents have further stated that the circular dated 18.03.2011 (A-11) is not relevant to the present applicant. This circular has been given application only to the State of Punjab employees based on Uma Devi (Supra) judgment and this circular had not been adopted by the Chandigarh Administration. The applicant was also not eligible to claim benefit of circular dated 18.03.2011 as she was appointed in February 2010 and had not even completed 03 years service as such on the date when the circular was issued.