DR. SURINDER SINGH JAMWAL AND ANR. versus THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 663 · Decided: 17-07-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

DR. SURINDER SINGH JAMWAL AND ANR. 
A 
v. 
THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS. 
JULY 17, 1996 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law--Reouitment-Adiwc appointment-Continuation for 
more than 13 years--Oaim for regularisation-Wiit-Dismissal by High 
Cowt-Appeal by adhoc appointees-Held the settled legal position is that 
reouitment should be govemed by statut01y 111/es-Regular recmitment should C 
be made by Public Se1vice Commission-Ad/we appoimments are only tem-
porwy appointments pending regular appointments without any 1ight to 
regularisation of se1vice-Directions issued to State Govemment to notify 
vacancies to Public Se1vice Co1111nission-Adhoc appointees to continue till 
regularly selected candidates am appointed-Age relaxation for adhoc appoin-
tees should be considered so that they can apply for recntitment-Life of Panel D 
of ~·elected candidates having expired due to suspension order of this Co111t 
the sanze was directed to be extended for the jJe1iod d1uing l11hich stay order 
was in operation. 
J & K Public Service Commission v. Dr. Nminder Mohan, [1994] 2 
sec 630, relied on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 9521 of 
1996. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 4.9.95 of the Jammu and 
Kashmir High Court in L.P.A. (S.W.) No. 63 of 1990. 
D.D. Thakur and L.R. Singh for the Appellants. 
Ashok Mathur for the State. 
Ranjit Kumar, Ms. Anu Mohla, for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
Leave granted, we have heard counsel on both sides. 
E 
F 
G 
The controversy raised in this case is squarely covered by the judg-
H 
663 
664 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
ment of this Court reported in J.& K Public Se1vice Commission v. Dr. 
B 
Nwinder Mohan, [1994] 2 SCC 630. It is not in dispute that the appellants 
were recruited on ad hoc basis and have been continuing as such. It is their 
contention that since they had put in more than 13 years of service they 
are entitled to regularisation of service and approached the High Court for 
direction to regularise their services. The High Court has followed the ratio 
in the above judgment and dismissed the petition. In the light of the 
judgment of this Court the settled legal position now is that the recruitment 
to the service should be governed by the appropriate statutory rules. Under 
the rules the regular recruitment to the posts shall be made by the Public 
Service Commission. Consequentially, the ad hoc appointments would be 
C only temporary appointments de ho"· the rules, pending regular, recruit-
ment without conferring any right to regularisation of service. This Court 
in Nminder Mohan'.' case (supra) had given the following directions: 
D 
E 
F 
G 
11Accordingly, we set aside the directions issued by the Division 
Bench of the High Court and confirm those of the Single Judge 
and direct that State Government of the J & K to notify the 
vacancies to the PSC which would process and complete the 
selection, as early as possible, within a period of six months from 
the date of the receipt of this order. The State Government should 
on receipt of the recon1mendation, make appointments in the order 
mentioned in the selection list within a period of two months 
thereafter. Since the respondents have been continuing as ad hoc 
doctors, they shall continue till the regularly selected candidates 
are appointed. They are also entitled to apply for selection. In case 
any of the respondents are barred by age, the State Government 
is directed to consider the cases for necessary relaxation under 
Ruic 9(3) of the age qualification. If any of the respondents are 
not selected, the ad hoc appointment shall stand terminated with 
the appointment of the selected candidate. The direction sought 
for by Dr. Vinay Rampa! cannot be given. His appeal is accordingly 
dismissed and the State appeal is also dismissed. The appeals of 
the PSC are accordingly allowed but in the circumstances parties 
are directed to bear their O\Vn costs.
11 
Following the above directions, there shall be a direction to the State 
Government to notify the vacancies to the Public Service Commission 
H within a period of two months from today. On notification so made, it 
DR.S.S.JAMWAL v. STATE 
665 
would be open lo the appellants to apply for regular recruitment. It would A 
be for the PSC to consider the respective claims of the candidates who 
have applied for and lo make necessary selection according to rules.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.