LexSTATE OF HARYANA versus HARYANA VETERINARY AND A.H.T.S. ASSOCIATION AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c STATE OF HARYANA v. HARYANA VETERINARY AND A.H.T.S. ASSOCIATION AND ANR. SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 [G.B. PATTANAIK, D.P. MOHAPATRA AND DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.] Service Law : Haryana Se'rvice of Engineers, Class II, Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1970: Selection Grade-Grant of-Ad hoc service rendered prior to regularisation-Counting of-Held, prior service rendered on ad hoc basis D is not regular service and cannot be tagged on to the latter service-Hence, ad hoc ser\Jice does not count towards regular service for grant of selection grade-<Jovermnent of Haryana Circular dated 2. 6: 1989 and Clarificatory Circular dated 16.5.1980. E Words and Phrases: "Regular Service" and "continuous service "-Meaning of-In the context of Haryana Service of Engineers, Class II, Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1970. The respondent was appointed to the post of Assistant Engineer on ad F hoc basis. Subsequently, the respondent was appointed on a regular basis under the Haryana Service of Engineers, Class II. Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1970 and a fresh appointment letter was issued to the respond'lnt. The respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court for grant G of selection grade on completion of 12 years of continuous service including that put in on ad hoc basis.in accordance with Government Circular dated 2.6.1989 and Clarificatory Circular dated 16.5.1990. A Full Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition. Hence this appeal. H Allowing the appeal, this Court 322 - STATEv. HARYANA VETERINARY ANDA.H.T.S.ASSON. 323 HELD : 1.1. The Government Circular dated 2.6.1989 and Clarificatory A Circular dated 16.5.1990 are unambiguous and unequivocally indicate that a Government servant would be entitled to the higher scale indicated therein on completion of 12 years of regular service. Ther~fore, the services rendered by the respondent on ad hoc basis which was not in accordance with the Haryana Service of Engineers, Class II, Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1970 cannot be taken into account for computation of the B period of 12 years indicated in the Circulars. [327-C-G) 1.2. Under the terms and conditions of the Circulars dated 2.6.1989 and 16.5.1990, the respondent would be entitled for being considered to have the Selection Grade on completion of 12 years from t~e date on which be was C appointed duly against a temporary post of Assistant Engineer and not from , any earlier point of time. The High Court committed serious error by equating the expression "regular service" with "continuous service". [327-H; 328-A] 2. The prior service rendered by the respondent on ad hoc basis cannot D be held to be regular service nor can it be tagged on to the latter service for earning the benefit under the Government Circular dated 2.6.1989 as well as the Clarificatory Circular dated 16.5.1990. [330-D) Rakesh Kumar Sing/av. State of Haryana, (Civil Writ petition No. E 15031) of 1993 (P & ff) (FB), reversed. r CIVIL APPELLATE JU.RISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 13423 of 1996. From the Judgment and Order dated 25.1.96 of the Punjab and Haryana F High Court in C.W.P. No. 3759of1995. WITH C.A. Nos. 15013/96, 179/97, 3016/97, 5983/97, 917/92, 5192/97, 5234-37/ G 97, 1889/98, 606812000, 606912000, 6070/2000, 607112000, 607212000. P.C. Jain, Neeraj Kumar Jain, Mahabir Singh, Debasis Misra, Ms. Minakshi Vij, B.S. Gupta, Ms. Indu Malhotra, Rao Ranjit, A.K. Mahajan, Manoj Swarup, A.D. Sikri, Ms. Naresh Bakshi, Goodwill Indeevar, Ms. Meera Mathur, T.C. Sharma, R.C. Kaushik, Ms. Santosh Singh and Anis Ahmed Khan for the H ~ 324 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. r A appearing parties. \< The Judgment of the Court was delivered by âĒr PATTANAIK, J. Delay condoned. I< '- B Leave granted in SL~ (C) Nos. 5518/97, 2948/98, 19093/98, 9932/2000 & SLP (C) NO. 17724/2000 (CC No. 3881 ). PATT ANAIK, J. In these batch of appeals, filed by the State of Haryana, . the question for consideration is, the services rendered by an ad hoc appointee on the basis of appointment made de hors the Recruitment Rules whether can c be counted for earning the benefits of higher scale of pay under the Government Memorandum, such appointees on being regularly appointed in accordance with the Recruitment Rules at a later point of time? Different appeals concern with the appointments made under the different departmen
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.