STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC. v. SUPREET RAJPAL AND ANR. ETC

Citation: [2007] 11 S.C.R. 1124

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT, P. SATHASIVAM

Case summary

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC. v. SUPREET RAJPAL AND ANR. ETC.pdf

Judgment text

~·· \ STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ETC. v. SUPREET RAJPAL AND ANR. ETC. NOVEMBER 13, 2007 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ. J Service Law: Regularisation ofservice ofpart time lecturer-Filing ofwrit petitions by respondents-part time lecturers-:-Allowed by High Court directing Authorities to consider themfor regularization-On appeal, Held: In the peculiarfacts ofthe case, it would be appropriatefor the High Court to deal with the matters a. fresh in the light ofthejudgment ofSupreme Court in the case ofHarguru Pratap Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors. ,-Thus, matter remitted to High Court for· consideration a. fresh. The question which arose for determination in these appeals was as to whether the High Courtwas right in directing the appellants for regularization ofservices ofthe respondents-part time lecturers, though no such reliefwas sought for by them.

Appellants contended that the prayer in the writ petitions was not for regularization ofthe services and the reliefsought for by them was different; and that by the impugned judgment, the High Court has directed to consider the case of the respondents for ~ regularization de-hors the contractual clause indicated in the advertisement and mentioned in the terms ofappointment. Disposing ofthe appeals, the Court HELD: On the peculiar facts ofthe case, it would be appropriate for the High Court to deal with the matters afresh in the light ofwhat bas been stated in the decided case ofHarguru Pratap Singh & Ors. v. State ofPunjab & Oi·s. The matters are remitted to the High Court .. for consideration afresh. [1127-B] Harguru Pratap Singh & Ors. v. State ofPurljab & Ors. etc. , C. A. No. 8745 of2003 (decided by Supreme Court on 7. 11. 2003), relied on. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 5165- 5167of2007. From the final Judgment and Order dated 2. 12.

2004 ofthe High Court ofPunjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 20036/03, 3766/04 & 7500/04. Kuldip Singh, R. K. Pandey, H. S. Sandhu, T. P. Mishra and Ajay Pal for the Appellant. Ugra Shankar Prasad and S. K. Sabharwal for the Respondent. I The Judgment ofthe Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Challenge in these appeals is to the order passed by a Division Bench ofthe High Comt ofPunjab & Haryana at Chandigarh allowing the writ petitions filed by the respondents who were appointed as part E time lecturers with the following directions: "In view of the above, the petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the petitioners for regularisation de-hors ofthe contractual clause indicated in the advertisement and also the same having been mentioned in the tenns ofappointment. Ifregularised, they shall also be considered for being placed in the regular pay scale with the initial pay payable accordingly.

This entire exercise be carried out by the respondents within three months from the date ofreceipt ofcertified copy of this judgment. It may be clarified that in view of the fact that the State has filed special leave petition against thejudgment rendered in Ms. Maninder Kaur's case (supra), the result thereofshall also affect the consideration and the reliefgrantable and granted to the petitioners. This fact, may be specifically mentioned in the orders Jr pay scale. The appeals shall stand allowed in part accordingly. " 6. It is also submitted that the case relied upon by the High Court has no relevance as it did not relate to part time lecturers and in fact related to some other part time engagements. It has also been submitted that in those cases also the matter has been remitted to the High Court. 7. On the peculiar facts ofthe case, we feel it would be appropriate for the High Court to deal with the matters afresh in the light ofwhat has been stated in Harguru 's case (supra).

The matters are remitted to the High Court for fresh consideration. 8. The appeals are accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs. S. K. S. Appeals disposed of. __, I