versus
State of H.P and others ...Respondents
Shammi Kumar and others .......Petitioners
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
State of H.P and others ...Respondents
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
For the petitioners: Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, Senior
Advocate with Mr.Arun
Kaushal, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with
Ms.Sharmila Patial, Mr.
Sushant Keprate, Addl. A.Gs
and Mr. Raj Negi, Dy. A.G for
respondents No.1 and 4-State.
Mr. Narender Singh Thakur,
Advocate for respondents No.2
and 3.
2. The petitioners were engaged as Daily Deposit
Collectors in the respondent-bank, in terms of the
policy/scheme for engaging Daily Deposit Collectors, as
1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
3. The salient features of the scheme are enumerated
The candidate shall have to bring a certificate from the
competent authority Le. revenue/HPPWD to support the
claim of residing within 8 KM of area from the concerned
Bank branch.
Semi Govt. employee.
(iii) The advertisement regarding vacancy of daily deposit
collector shall be given in local news papers with full
terms and conditions/eligibility for wide publicity in
general public. Local Bodies, i.e. MC, Nagar
Parishad/Nagar Panchavat and Panchayat may also be
intimated in this respect.
(iv) The names of the candidates should be registered with
the local employment exchange.
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
Computer knowledge, minimum one year diploma 10
from recognized institute (F).
The personal interview i.e. viva will consists of 15 marks to
be awarded by a selection committee jointly consisting of
local Bank Director or in his absence Director nominated by
the Bank Chairman, concerned AGM & Br. Manager. The
final selection list will be drawn by Selection committee
purely on the basis of total marks obtained on the academic
record and personal Interview. The academic qualification
marks shall be awarded by the selection committee after
proper verification of original certificates in support of it
produced by the candidates.
The results of the successful candidates will be notified/
intimated to all successful candidates by Registered Post
immediately after approval of competent authority.
The committee will submit its recommendations to the
Bank management. The final authority of appointment shall
be the appointing authority as provided in Service Rules of
the Bank.
9) Right of Regularization:-
The DDCs so engaged will have no right of regularization in
the Bank.
10) Other Conditions:-
a) The DOCS shall have to execute an agreement & surety
bond on the prescribed format through an affidavit.
b) The DOCs so engaged shall have to submit the required
documents duly attested viz academic qualification,
bonafide certificate, character certificate, cast and medical
certificate etc.
c) One Casual Leave will be admissible after one month of
service.
d) The DDCs will not be entitled for any honorarium during
the period of unauthorized absence.
e) Unauthorized absence fork duty without approval of
competent authority shall automatically lead to
termination.
f) No TA/DA shall be paid for interview and joining.
g) Yearly hike of Rs. 500/- will be given to the DDCs in case
the period of engagement is extended beyond one year.
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
h) The DDCs will have to deposit a security amount of Rs.
10000/-in the shape of FD along with two sureties.
i) The Kith and kin of DOCS shall have no claim for
employment in the Bank on compassionate ground basis
under the scheme.
j) The Bank will prepare a common merit list of the DDCs at
Head office level.
k) Any other conditions which may be incorporated in the
scheme from time to time by the management of the Bank."
4. According to the petitioners, the Managing
Committee of the bank vide its Resolution No.7 dated
17.06.2022 proposed conversion of Daily Deposit Collectors into
recovery Supervisor on contract basis and, therefore, the
following resolution came to be passed:-
Agenda Item No.7
Regarding conversion of the services of Daily Deposit
Collectors into Recovery Supervisor on Contract
basis.
Resolution:- The General Manager placed before the
Managing Committee, a request letter received from the
Bank Employees Union regarding conversion of the services
of the Daily Deposit Collectors into Recovery Supervisor on
Contract basis. The General Manager further apprised the
Managing Committee that there is no provision for the
regularization or conversion of the services of Daily Deposit
Collector in the policy framed by the State Bank. Therefore,
the request of Bank Employees Union & representation
submitted by the Daily Deposit Collectors is required to be
forwarded to the State Bank for making provision in the
policy as such, the Managing Committee of the KPARD
Bank is not competent enough to take any decision on the
subject at our own.
The Managing Committee after detailed deliberation
agreed to the explanation made by the General Manager
and directed him to forward the request to the State Bank
for consideration."
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
5. Later on, the Joint Registrar (Credit), Co-operative
Societies wrote to the Secretary Co-operative, requesting him to
seek the opinion of the Department of Personnel, Government of
Himachal Pradesh on the following two points:-
a) If the DDC'S may be brought in regular staffing norms of the
bank by way of promotion against a fixed percentage or
quota.
(b) And can the existing sanctioned numbers and quota(direct
promote) of a class- 3 post of the bank may be amended by
way of required amendments in the service rules for the
employees of HP State Co Op agriculture and rural
development bank Limited to make provisions for Daily
Deposit collector.
6. When no decision was being taken on the reference
made, the petitioners represented to the Hon'ble Chief Minister
and filed representations and since no action was taken, have
filed these petitions on the ground inter-alia, seeking following
reliefs:-
i. By way of issuance of an appropriate writ, order or
direction, in the nature of certiorari to declare rule no. 9
of the policy (annexure P-1)ultra virus as same is in
violation of part iii of the constitution of India.
ii. By way of issuance of an appropriate writ, order or
direction in the nature of Mandamus against the
respondents to regularize the service of the Daily
Deposit Collectors (petitioner).
iii. By way of issuance of an appropriate writ, order or
direction in the nature of mandamus with direction to
frame /amend the policy Annexure P-1 in the favour of
petitioner so he could be benefited a like other regular
employee of the bank & contract employee of state govt.
for the sake of parity with respect to work.
iv. That Annexure P-9 i.e. Recruitment Advertisement may
kindly be quashed and set aside and response dent
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
may kindly be directed to promote the petitioner being
eligible for the post of recovery supervisor.
7. When the matter came up consideration before this
Court on 20.05.2025, the Managing Director of the respondent-
bank and the Joint Registrar (Credit), Co-operative Society, H.P.
who addressed letter dated 03.01.2024 to the Secretary (Coop),
to the Government of Himachal Pradesh are directed personally
remain present before the Court along-with the relevant record.
8. In compliance to the aforesaid orders, both the
officials have appeared before the Court and the Joint Registrar
has placed on record certain documents including a
communication dated 17.04.2025 from the Secretary (Co-
operative) to the Registrar, whereby the reference made by the
Joint Registrar (Credit) has been answered in the following
manner:-
"I am directed to refer to your letter No.5-337/95-
Coop.(C&M)-X dated 03th January 2024, 05th March
2024 & 04th July 2024 on the subject cited and to say
that the matter was taken up with personnel department
as well as Law department. In this context, it has been
advised that the recruitment to any post/service cannot be
made in the absence of Recruitment and Promotion
Rules/Service Rules for the said post and there are no
specific recruitment/service rules & regulations for the
cadre /post of Daily Deposit Collectors. The Daily Deposit
Collectors cannot be equated under regular norms unless
such recruitment/service rules & regulations are
framed/made. Therefore they cannot be brought in
specific staffing norms."
9. Adverting to the case, a perusal of the policy would
go to indicate that mode of engagement was based entirely on
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
residence criteria where the candidate was required to be a
permanent resident of the area within the radius of 8 kilometers
from the concerned Branch.
10. The tenure of service was initially for one year which
was extendable on yearly basis up-to five years depending upon
the requirement, work, conduct and performance during the
period of engagement.
11. The services of the petitioners could be terminated
at any time on either side by giving one month notice or one
month honorarium in lieu thereof. The Daily Deposit Collectors
so engaged under the scheme and were paid monthly
honorarium of Rs.3000/- and yearly hike of Rs.500/- every
year, in case the period of engagement is extended beyond one
year.
12. The selection was to be made on the basis of
academic record for which 85 marks had been prescribed and
for the viva voce 15 marks had been prescribed. The
distribution of educational qualifications marks have already
been set out in para 8 of the scheme (supra).
13. Lastly and more importantly, it is clearly provided in
Clause 9 of the scheme that the Daily Deposit Collectors so
engaged will have no right of regularization in the bank.
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
14. Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned Senior Advocate
assisted by Mr.Arun Kaushal, Advocate has placed strong
reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case
titled as State of Haryana and others vs. Piara Singh and
others 1992 AIR 2130, 1992 SCR (3) 826 to contend that
efforts must be made to regularize the work charge employees
and casual labourers as early as possible, subject to their
fulfilling the qualification, if any, for the post.
15. The aforesaid judgment is not applicable to the fact
situation obtaining in the instant case as it cannot be disputed
that the petitioners herein were selected and appointed
pursuant to an advertisement which never envisaged
appointment on permanent basis and rather made it clear that
the same was on contractual basis with no right of
regularization. Thus, there is different of fact situation
obtaining in the instant case vis-à-vis Piara Singh's case (supra)
which is stark and clear.
16. Once the appointments were purely contractual then
by efflux of time as envisaged in the contract itself, the same
came to an end and the persons holding such posts can have no
right to continue or renewal of contract of service as a matter of
right. It lies best in the wisdom of the employer to grant such
appointments on contract on various terms and unless the
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
decision making process is established to be arbitrary on the
face of it, the Court will be loath to exercise its extra-ordinary
jurisdiction to quash such appointment of fixed term basis.
17. There is a clear distinction between public
employment governed by the statutory rules and private
employment governed purely by contract. No doubt with the
development of law, there has been a paradigm shift with regard
to judicial review of administrative action whereby the writ court
can examine the validity of termination order passed by the
public authority and it is no longer open to the authority
passing the order to argue that the action in the realm of
contract is not open to judicial review. However, the scope of
interference of judicial review is confined and limited. The writ
court is entitled to judicially review the action and determine
whether there was any illegality, perversity, unreasonableness,
unfairness or irrationality that would vitiate the action, no
matter the action is in the realm of contract.
18. However, judicial review cannot extend to the Court
acting as an appellate authority sitting in judgment over the
decision. The Court cannot sit in the arm chair of the
administrator to decide whether more reasonable decision or
course of action could have been taken in the circumstances.
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
(Refer Gridco Ltd. & Another vs. Sadananda Doloi & Ors,
AIR 2012 SC 729).
19. It may be noticed that the petitioners had voluntarily
accepted the appointment granted to them subject to the
conditions clearly stipulated in the contract or the terms of
appointment. These appointments subject to the conditions
have been accepted with their eyes wide open, therefore, now
the petitioners cannot turn around claiming higher rights
ignoring the conditions subject to which the appointments had
been accepted.
20. Moreover, advertising the posts, as fixed term
contractual appointment initially and thereafter permitting the
incumbents so appointed to continue till the age of
superannuation, would amount to playing fraud with those
multitude of people, who would otherwise be eligible to apply
and may have skipped the employment process thinking that it
is only for a temporary period or a contractual period.
21. In Secretary, State of Karnataka and others vs.
Uma Devi (3) and others, (2006) 4 SCC 1, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court had clearly held that the courts are not to be
swayed by the consideration that the concerned person has
worked for some time or for a considerable length of time as the
person, who is engaged on such appointment is temporary or
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
casual or contractual, is fully aware of the nature of his
employment and having accepted such appointments with eyes
open cannot turn around and claim permanency or
continuation as this would create another mode of employment,
which is not permissible. It is relevant to reproduce relevant
observations as under:
"[45] While directing that appointments, temporary or
casual, be regularized or made permanent, courts are
swayed by the fact that the concerned person has
worked for some time and in some cases for a
considerable length of time. It is not as if the person who
accepts an engagement either temporary or casual in
nature, is not aware of the nature of his employment. He
accepts the employment with eyes open. It may be true
that he is not in a position to bargain not at arms length
since he might have been searching for some employment
so as to eke out his livelihood and accepts whatever he
gets. But on that ground alone, it would not be
appropriate to jettison the constitutional scheme of
appointment and to take the view that a person who has
temporarily or casually got employed should be directed
to be continued permanently. By doing so, it will be
creating another mode of public appointment which is not
permissible. If the court were to void a contractual
employment of this nature on the ground that the parties
were not having equal bargaining power, that too would
not enable the court to grant any relief to that employee.
A total embargo on such casual or temporary employment
is not possible, given the exigencies of administration and
if imposed, would only mean that some people who at
least get employment temporarily, contractually or
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
casually, would not be getting even that employment
when securing of such employment brings at least some
succor to them. After all, innumerable citizens of our vast
country are in search of employment and one is not
compelled to accept a casual or temporary employment if
one is not inclined to go in for such an employment. It is
in that context that one has to proceed on the basis that
the employment was accepted fully knowing the nature of
it and the consequences flowing from it. In other, words,
even while accepting the employment, the person
concerned knows the nature of his employment. It is not
an appointment to a post in the real sense of the term.
The claim acquired by him in the post in which he is
temporarily employed or the interest in that post cannot
be considered to be of such a magnitude as to enable the
giving up of the procedure established, for making regular
appointments to available posts in the services of the
State. The argument that since one has been working for
some time in the post, it will not be just to discontinue
him, even though he was aware of the nature of the
employment when he first took it up, is not one that
would enable the jettisoning of the procedure established
by law for public employment and would have to fail
when tested on the touchstone of constitutionality and
equality of opportunity enshrined in Article 14 of the
constitution of India."
22. As a last ditch effort, learned counsel for the
petitioners would then contend that they have legitimate
expectation to continue in service.
23. As already observed earlier, appointments offered to
the petitioners were limited one and the respondents had not at
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
any given time offered to the petitioners that they would
continue in service till perpetuity or till the date they attain the
age of superannuation. It is not even the case of the petitioners
that there was any uncertainty or ambiguity in the
appointments made by the respondents insofar as the tenure to
which they were appointed. Therefore, the question of legitimate
expectation to continue in service does not arise. The petitioners
at the time of entering into contractual appointment were fully
aware of the consequences of appointments being contractual in
nature, therefore, such a person(s) cannot invoke the theory of
legitimate expectation for being continued in the post.
24. Identical issue has already been considered by the
Constitution Bench in Uma Devi's case (supra) and it was
negated by observing as under:
"[46] Learned senior counsel for some of the
respondents argued that on the basis of the doctrine of
legitimate expectation, the employees, especially of the
Commercial taxes Department, should be directed to be
regularized since the decisions in dharwad (supra) ,
Piara Singh (supra) jacob, and Gujarat Agricultural
University and the like, have given rise to an expectation
in them that their services would also be regularized.
The doctrine can be invoked if the decisions of the
Administrative authority affect the person by depriving
him of some benefit or advantage which either (i) he had
in the past been permitted by the decision-maker to
enjoy and which he can legitimately expect to be
permitted to continue to do until there have been
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
communicated to him some rational grounds for
withdrawing it on which he has been given an
opportunity to comment; or (ii) he has received
assurance from the decision- maker that they will not be
withdrawn without giving him first an opportunity of
advancing reasons for contending that they should not
be withdrawn {see Lord diplock in Council of Civil
Service unions v. Minister for the Civil Service, national
Buildings Construction Corpn. v. S. Raghunathan, and
Dr. Chanchal goyal v. State of Rajasthan. There is no
case that any assurance was given by the government or
the concerned department while making the
appointment on daily wages that the status conferred on
him will not be withdrawn until some rational reason
comes into existence for withdrawing it. The very
engagement was against the constitutional scheme.
Though, the commissioner of the Commercial taxes
Department sought to get the appointments made
permanent, there is no case that at the time of
appointment any promise was held out. No such
promise could also have been held out in view of the
circulars and directives issued by the Government after
the dharwad decision. Though, there is a case that the
State had made regularizations in the past of similarly
situated employees, the fact remains that such
regularizations were done only pursuant to judicial
directions, either of the Administrative Tribunal or of the
High Court and in some case by this court. Moreover,
the invocation of the doctrine of legitimate expectation
cannot enable the employees to claim that they must be
made permanent or they. must be regularized in the
service though they had not been selected in terms of
the rules for appointment. The fact that in certain cases
the Court had directed regularization of the employees
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
involved in those cases cannot be made use of to found
a claim based on legitimate expectation. The argument if
accepted would also run counter to the constitutional
mandate. The argument in that behalf has therefore to
be rejected. [47] When a person enters a temporary
employment or gets engagement as a contractual or
casual worker and the engagement is not based on a
proper selection as recognized by the relevant rules or
procedure, he is aware of the consequences of the
appointment being temporary, casual or contractual in
nature. Such a person cannot invoke the theory of
legitimate expectation for being confirmed in the post
when an appointment to the post could be made only by
following a proper procedure for selection and in
concerned cases, in consultation with the Public Service
commission. Therefore, the theory of legitimate
expectation cannot be successfully advanced by
temporary, contractual or casual employees. It cannot
also be held that the state has held out any promise
while engaging these persons either to continue them
where they are or to make them permanent. The State
cannot constitutionally make such a promise. It is also
obvious that the theory cannot be invoked to seek a
positive relief of being made permanent in the post.
25. As already observed above, the petitioners having
accepted the offer of appointment with eyes open cannot turn
around by claiming higher rights ignoring the conditions subject
to which the appointments had been accepted. There was no
uncertainty or ambiguity in the appointments made by the
respondents insofar as the tenure to which they were appointed.
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
26. In Director, Institute of Management
Development, U.P. vs. Pushpa Srivastava, 1992 (3) SCR 712,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that since the appointment was
purely on contractual and ad hoc basis on consolidated pay for
a fixed period and terminable without notice, when the
appointment came to an end by efflux of time, the appointee
had no right to continue in the post and to claim regularization
in service in the absence of any rule providing for regularization
after the period of service.
27. One cannot lose sight of the concept of
circumstantial flexibility, one additional or different fact may
make a world of difference between conclusions in two cases.
Disposal of cases by blindly placing reliance on a decision is
improper.
28. The following words of Lord Denning in the matter
of applying precedents have become quite authoritative over the
years:
"Each case depends on its own facts and a close
similarity between one case and another is not enough
because even a single significant detail may alter the
entire aspect. In deciding such cases, one should avoid
the temptation to decide cases (as said by Cardozo) by
matching the colour of one case against the colour of
another. To decide therefore, on which side of the line a
case falls, the broad resemblance to another case is not
at all decisive. ????. Precedent should be followed only so
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
far as it marks the path of justice, but you must cut the
dead wood and trim off the side branches else you will
find yourself lost in thickets and branches. My plea is to
keep the path to justice clear of obstructions which could
impede it."
29. It is also well settled that regularization, absorption
or permanent continuance of an employee cannot be directed by
a Court, unless the employees have been appointed in
pursuance of a regular recruitment in accordance with relevant
rules in an open competitive process against sanctioned vacant
posts. In taking this view, we are supported by the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan & Ors.
versus Daya Lal & Ors. (2011) 2 SCC 429. It is apt to
reproduce here relevant observations as contained in para of the
judgment, which read as under:-
"12. We may at the outset refer to the following well
settled principles relating to regularization and parity in
pay, relevant in the context of these appeals:
(i) High Courts, in exercising power under Article 226 of
the Constitution will not issue directions for
regularization, absorption or permanent continuance,
unless the employees claiming regularization had been
appointed in pursuance of a regular recruitment in
accordance with relevant rules in an open competitive
process, against sanctioned vacant posts. The equality
clause contained in Articles 14 and 16 should be
scrupulously followed and courts should not issue a
direction for regularization of services of an employee
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
which would be violative of constitutional scheme. While
something that is irregular for want of compliance with
one of the elements in the process of selection which
does not go to the root of the process, can be regularized,
back door entries, appointments contrary to the
constitutional scheme and/or appointment of ineligible
candidates cannot be regularized."
30. Similar issue has already been considered by
learned Division Bench of this Court in its judgment, authored
by one of us (Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan), in Dr. Rajesh
Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India, 2020 (Suppl.) Him. L.R.
(DB) 2510."
31. Apart from the above, it needs to be noticed that the
petitioners have been appointed mainly because they were
permanent residents of the distance within a radius of 8
kilometers from the concerned branch. Meaning thereby, all the
other meritorious candidates who were beyond this distance
were ineligible and could not, therefore, compete. Such
appointments mainly based on distance cannot be held to be
appointments based upon a competitive process.
32. The Court cannot have any misplaced sympathy for
the petitioners only because they have approached the Court
ignoring the rights of other candidates, who may have been
better qualified, better suited, but were ineligible as they were
not residing within the radius of 8 kilometers. There could be
( 2025:HHC:15618 )
instances, where the candidates even though residing within the
radius of 8 kilometers, but did not apply solely because the
appointment in terms of Clause 9 was clearly tenure based with
no right whatsoever of regularization. The Court cannot decide
the cases based on sympathy alone. The petitioners have to
establish a legal right, which they have miserably failed to do so.
33. In view of the discussion made above and for the
reasons stated, we find no merit in these petitions and the same
are accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
( Tarlok Singh Chauhan )
Judge
May , 2025 ( Sushil Kukreja )
(naveen) Judge
