Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Justice Arun Bhansali dismissed a writ petition which sought to restrain the respondents from terminating their contractual services based on grounds that the contract had been in effect for very long.
The petitioner on 03/09/2015 applied for a post under DAY-NULM. The above mentioned was restructured and the posts offered were purely on a contractual basis. A private firm by the name of T&M Services Consulting Pvt. Ltd. was engaged for manning posts and filling up the vacancies. The respondents now have decided to end the contractual posts and replace the present staff with a new batch of employees.
The petitioner presented that upon affirmation, his period was of one year. The period was renewed over and over again. on 08/03/2019, the respondents were found to invite bids for the shortlisting of HR agencies as service providers for the implementation of the DAY NULM scheme.
Regarding this it was submitted by the petitioner that the engagement of placement cells by the respondents was not justified. However, mere engagement proved nothing. Also stress was laid upon the case Mohd Abdul Kadir v DGP 2009 6 SCC 611. Regarding the matter, the apex court of the country had held that when an appointment was made on a contractual basis, the fact that the contract had been renewed for decades did not matter. No person could claim regularization under these grounds.
The Court also held that mere shortlisting of HR agencies did not provide the petitioner any ground to file a suit against the respondents. The petitioner had no right to invoke the special jurisdiction stated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence the Court dismissed the writ petition.
86540
103860
630
114
59824