Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(viii) to extend the benefit of maternity leave to female teachers.

4. 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.

10. Now the main question for determination is--Whether the respondents can be commanded to consider regularisation of the services of the contract appointees?. Mr. R.P. Bali and Mr. T.S. Chauhan, learned Counsel for some of the applicants vehemently argued that in view of the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Jacob M. Puthuparambil and Ors. v. Kerala Water Authority etc., AIR 1990 SC 2228 and State of Haryana v. Piara Singh, AIR 1992 SC 2130=1992(3) SLJ 34 (SC), followed by subsequent decisions of various High Courts in a number of cases including Sanjay Kumar v. Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad and Ors., 2000(3) SLR 62; Rashtriya Koila Mazdoor Congress etc. v. Steel Authority of India and Ors. etc., 2000(7) SLR 252; Awadesh Kumar Yadav v. Divisional Forest Officer (D.F.O), Mainpuri and Ors., 2001(2) SLR 90; Mahabir Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors., 2001(1) SLR 482; Chief General Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Bangalore v. Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore and Anr., 2002(2) SLR 417; Hassan Mohd. and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors., 2003(4)SLR 1 and a decision of Principal Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mehar Chand v. Union of India and Ors., 1993(3) SLR 176 and the decision of this Bench dated 13.9.1990 in O.A. No. 1105-CH-89--Smt. Baljit Kaur v. Union of India and Ors., the teachers appointed on contract basis are entitled to the regularisation of their services as they have been working for a number of years. This submission has been repelled by Mr. N.K. Bhardwaj, learned Counsel for the respondent-Administration. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter. The school teachers are appointed in accordance with the School Cadre Rules of 1991. Since for variety of reasons, as discussed in Krishna Kumar's case, regular recruitment could not take place, there arose a necessity to appoint the teachers on contract basis so that the education of the students may go on. The appointment of the contract appointees obviously is de hors the School Cadre of Rules 1991. The appointments on contract basis have been made by way of stop gap arrangement which were to last, in any case, till the appointment of duly selected regular teachers under the statutory rules are made. Not only this, the contract teachers have not been appointed by the Competent Authority under the rules. The procedure prescribed for selection and recruitment under the rules was never followed. In these circumstances, the contract appointees have not acquired a vested or indefeasible right to seek regularisation of their services.

11. There is yet another aspect of the matter. The teachers appointed on contract basis have taken up the assignment knowing it full well that they are to be substituted and replaced by the regularly selected teachers. Earlier on the expiry of the term of contract appointment, when it was not proposed to be extended, a chain of litigation ensued. Matter was considered by this Bench, Punjab & Haryana High Court as well as the Supreme Court in different cases filed by the contract teachers. All these cases have been discussed in Krishan Kumar's case. The firm legal position which flows from the various decisions is that all the contract appointees are subject to replacement and substitution by the teachers appointed on regular basis in accordance with statutory rules. Some of the present applicants have prayed for a direction to the respondents to regularise their services after framing a scheme. If this prayer is allowed it would tantamount to setting at naught and rendering nugatory all the decisions rendered in the past. The various decisions on which reliance has been placed by the learned Counsel for the applicants who have claimed regularisation of their services are not applicable to the facts of the case, particularly keeping in view the statutory rules. Mr. N.K. Bhardwaj places reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 159-CH-2001 Anupama Bhardwaj and Ors. v. U.T. Chandigarh and Ors., decided on 11th October, 2002 to lend strength to his submission that regularisation of contract appointees is not possible as it has been refused after deliberating the issue threadbare. The respondents have initiated the exercise to recruit the teachers in accordance with the School Cadre Rules of 1991. No mandamus can be issued to prevent an authority from performing a duty according to law. No Court would say that an authority should commit the breach of law. In substance, no mandamus issues to violate the law. For these reasons, the prayer for regularisation of services or for restraining respondents from selecting the regular teachers according to the rules cannot be granted. To say the least, this prayer is misconceived.

18. Learned Counsel for the applicants have attacked the replacement or substitution of the contract teachers by the respondents in an arbitrary and capricious manner inasmuch as regularly selected teachers according to the rules, are being posted without following the principle of 'first come last go' or put it differently 'last come first go' and ignoring the vacancies in other institutions. It was pointed out, what the respondent authorities are doing is that they pass orders posting the regular teachers selected according to the rules to relieve any contractual appointee in an arbitrary and selective manner. This aspect of the matter needs to be taken care of as the respondent-Administration has to exhibit fairness and impartiality in relieving and substituting the contract appointees. As said above, there is one integrated common cadre of teachers at the State level. The cadre is not schoolwise. The total sanctioned strength of the school teachers in the different places is spread over the different schools under the Administration. The Administration knows the length of service of the contract appointees as well as the various vacancies occurring in the different subjects/discipline in various schools. To put an end to the controversies which sometimes have reflection on the integrity and impartiality of the authorities concerned and to maintain transparency in the administration, it would be necessary to prepare a consolidated list of all the contract appointees with reference to the date of their appointment. If there are more than one or many teachers appointed on the same date, in that event, the date of birth shall determine seniority, meaning thereby who is older in age would be senior to the younger one, if appointed on the same date. Similarly, there should be a list reflecting the sanctioned posts and vacancies in various disciplines in different schools. Once it is done, the authorities concerned shall appoint the regularly selected teachers in the first instance against the vacant posts and, if at all, it is necessary to relieve a contractual appointee in that event, the principle of 'last come first go' shall be followed i.e. junior most contract-teacher, regardless of the fact in which school he/she is working, shall be relieved. This procedure shall be followed and repeated while posting the regular selected teachers to replace and substitute the contract appointees.