Service Law – Regularization – Promotion – Ad-hoc service – Non joining of other persons to be effected. Though the petitioner’s appointment under Regulation 3(f) was for a period longer than 4 months, the same being a stop gap appointment on ad-hoc basis and the same not having been regularized, the petitioner’s service on ad-hoc basis cannot be counted for the purpose of seniority. The service of the petitioner would have to be counted only from the date he was regularly appointed to the post of Lecturer, Psychiatric Nursing i.e. on 15.10.2019.
There is another aspect of the matter which has to be considered, i.e. if the prayer of the petitioner is allowed, the same could cause prejudice to Dulmoni Das and Hiramoni Barman, as Dulmoni Das is the first in the merit list of Lecturer, Psychiatric Nursing. The case of the Dulmoni Das would also have to be considered, as her appointment had been held up on due to the writ petition, which had been ultimately dismissed. As her seniority vis-à-vis the petitioner would be affected, the non-joinder of the Dulmoni Das as a party in the writ petition is also an issue that will have to be considered, as the issue of inter-se-seniority between the Lecturers of Psychiatric Nursing would crop up. As such, the ad-hoc service of the petitioner under Regulation 3(f) cannot be considered as regular service. (Para 16)
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
2023 STPL(Web) 115 Gauhati
[GAHC010149502022]
Nabanita Sarma Vs. State Of Assam And 2 Ors
Case No. WP(C) 4938 of 2022-Decided on 26-9-2023
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-STPLWeb-115-Gauhati.pdf
