Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bhawana Jangir And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Others on 7 December, 2022
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -1-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
103+261 (17 cases) + CM-13397-CWP-2022 &
265 (03 cases) CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
(1) CWP-14660-2020
Date of Decision :07.12.2022
Lalita Sharma and another ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(2) CWP-15073-2020
Ravita and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(3) CWP-22367-2020
Manju Bala and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(4) CWP-22369-2020
Mintu Yadav ...Petitioner
1 of 15
::: Downloaded on - 27-12-2022 06:04:53 :::
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -2-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(5) CWP-18454-2020
Laleeta and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(6) CWP-15096-2020
Usha Rani ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(7) CWP-14163-2020
Premlata Yadav ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
CM-3103-CWP-2022 in/&
(8) CWP-14166-2020
Anju Sharma ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
2 of 15
::: Downloaded on - 27-12-2022 06:04:54 :::
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -3-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
(9) CWP-14168-2020
Sushma Kumari @ Sushma Shekhawat ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(10) CWP-14867-2020
Sushila Kumari ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(11) CWP-16337-2020
Monika Manchanda and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(12) CWP-16471-2020
Bhawana Jangir and another ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(13) CWP-14937-2020
Seema ...Petitioner
3 of 15
::: Downloaded on - 27-12-2022 06:04:54 :::
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -4-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(14) CWP-15484-2020
Vipin Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(15) CWP-5423-2021
Manju Bala ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(16) CWP-6414-2021 (O&M)
Harsha Bhatia ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
(17) CWP-6759-2021
Vinod ...Petitioner
Versus
4 of 15
::: Downloaded on - 27-12-2022 06:04:54 :::
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -5-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
265-(1) CWP-1385-2021
Ankita Budhiraja ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
265-(2) CWP-2024-2021
Rajvinder Kaur ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
265-(3) CWP-8089-2021
Satish Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Present: Mr. Sunil K Nehra, Advocate for the petitioners
in CWP-14660-2020 and CWP-14867-2020.
Mr. Mazlish Khan, Advocate for the petitioners
in CWP Nos.15073, 18454, 15096, 15484-2020 and
CWP-6759-2021.
5 of 15
::: Downloaded on - 27-12-2022 06:04:54 :::
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -6-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
Mr. Suresh Kumar Kaushik, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP-14163, 14168,
22367, 14166, 14937, 22369 of 2020 and
CWP Nos. 1385, 2024 & 8089 of 2021 and
for applicant in CM-3103-CWP-2022
Mr. Dalbir Singh, Advocate for the petitioners
in CWP-16337, 16471 of 2020 and 5423 of 2021.
Mr. Rajesh Gaur, Addl.A.G. Haryana.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Birla, Advocate
for the applicants-respondents No.34 to 37 in
CMs-13399-98-CWP-2022.
Mr. Satbir Singh Gill, Advocate
for the respondents No.4 to 33 and for applicants in
CM-11425-CWP-2020 and CM-13601-CWP-2020 in
in CWP-14660-2020.
***
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)
CM-13397-CWP-2022
As prayed for, application is allowed.
Main Case
By this common order, above mentioned writ petitions are
being disposed of as all the writ petitions involve the same question of law
based on similar facts.
In the present writ petitions, the petitioners, who are working as
Extension Lecturers with the respondent-State of Haryana though,
unqualified to be appointed on regular basis keeping in view the rules
governing the service, have approached this Court with a prayer that the
action of the respondents in relieving them from service is arbitrary and
illegal keeping in view the fact that in the earlier round of litigation,
Coordinate Bench of this Court allowed the ineligible Extension Lecturers
6 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -7-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
to continue in service till the eligible candidates are appointed on regular
basis or eligible candidates are appointed as Extension Lecturers in their
places by following due process of law.
According to the petitioners, in view of the order passed by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court in the bunch of petitions being CWP-20767
of 2017 titled as Anita vs. State of Haryana and others decided on
25.01.2018, the petitioners have a right to continue in service till they are
replaced by regularly selected candidates or by candidates having required
qualification as envisaged under the rules governing the service. As per the
petitioners, the said judgment of the learned Single Judge has already been
upheld hence, order dated 11.09.2020 (Annexure P/12) passed by the
respondents relieving the petitioners from service is liable to be set aside.
Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that even otherwise,
order dated 11.09.2020 (Annexure P/12) relieving the petitioners from
service cannot be sustained for the reason that the same has been passed on
the basis of the Instructions dated 04.03.2020 issued by the respondent-
State of Haryana so as to relieve the ineligible Extension Lecturers, whereas
the same instructions have already been interpreted by the Division Bench
of this Court in LPA No.814 of 2021 titled as Amrit Kaur Vs. State of
Haryana and others vide interim order dated 10.11.2021 to mean that
ineligible candidates can continue in service as per Policy dated 04.03.2020
of the State of Haryana till they are replaced by the regularly selected
candidates or by candidates who are fully eligible as per the rules governing
the service. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that said interim
7 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -8-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
order dated 10.11.2021 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Amrit
Kaur (supra) has attained finality as special leave petition filed against the
said order by the State of Haryana was withdrawn by them.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that in some
of the cases, the petitioners have attained eligibility while they were
working as Extension Lecturers hence, their cases need to be reexamined on
the basis of the fact that they have already attained the required qualification
envisaged under the rules governing the service.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that once the
petitioners are not eligible to teach the students keeping in view the rules
governing the service, they have no right to continue in service especially,
after Policy dated 04.03.2020, according to which, all the ineligible
Extension Lecturers were required to be relieved from service. Learned
counsel for the respondents further submits that as per his instructions,
requisition for 1500 posts of Lecturers in different subjects have already
been sent to the Haryana Public Service Commission for making regular
selection hence, prayer of the petitioners for allowing them to continue in
service despite being ineligible to hold the post in question may kindly be
declined.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone
through the record with their able assistance.
The question which has arisen before this Court is whether the
candidates who are ineligible to be appointed as lecturer can be allowed to
continue in service till they are replaced by the regularly selected candidates
or by andidates who fulfills the qualification required under the rules
8 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -9-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
governing the service.
A similar prayer was raised by the petitioners before this Court
on an earlier round of litigation in CWP-20767-2017 and connected cases
and after hearing both the parties, order dated 25.01.2018 has been passed
by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Relevant paragraph of the order is as
under:-
"5. In case, NET qualified candidates are not available in
response to the advertisements inviting applications for
Extension Lecturers, to the extent of vacancies notified, then
the petitioners, who do not possess NET certificates, will have
a right to continue as Extension Lecturers for the time being
provided their work, conduct and performance is satisfactory.
Those petitioners, who are not NET qualified but fall within
the deficit/shortfall of advertised vacancies will not be
replaced by a similar arrangement till direct recruitment is
made and regular candidates are available for joining the cadre
posts. However, in cases, where the NET qualified candidates
are available to fill all the vacancies required to be filled from
amongst Extension Lecturers then it will be open to the
Government to engage the petitioners who are NET qualified
to the exclusion of others."
As per the said order, the petitioners have been allowed to
continue in service till they are replaced by regularly selected candidates or
workload existed or the qualified Extension Lecturers are available to
replace them.
The said judgment was tested before the Division Bench of this
Court in LPA No.395-2020, which LPA was decided by the Division Bench
of this Court on 06.08.2020. Before the LPA Bench, the prayer of the
unqualified Extension Lecturers was that they be given opportunity to
9 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -10-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
acquire NET qualification and till the acquisition of the said qualification,
they be allowed to continue in service. The said contention was raised on
the ground that they have already been working for a considerable years.
The Division Bench while considering the said plea, recorded
certain findings in order dated 06.08.2020 passed in LPA No.395-2020 that
unqualified lecturers cannot claim continuity in service especially, when
Policy dated 04.03.2020 insists upon NET qualification so as to continue
even on the post of Extension Lecturer. Further prayer of the ineligible
candidates to allow them to continue in service till they acquire minimum
qualification was also declined by the Division Bench in para 06 of the said
order. Not only this, the Division Bench recorded the finding that once a
candidate does not possess mandatory NET qualification, they cannot
continue in service and it does not lie in the right of the ineligible
candidates to demand as to how they are to be replaced. Relevant
paragraphs of the said judgment of the Division Bench in LPA No.395-2020
are as under:-
"5. As far as this contention is concerned, learned
counsel for the Respondents has pointed out that
minimum requirement of NET qualification has been
consistently insisted upon by the State in its policies and
has been reiterated in its recent policy dated 4th March,
2020.
6. Since, as of date there is no such policy to grant time
to serving contractual Extension Lecturers, not
possessing NET time to possess such qualification while
continuing in service, it is not possible for the Court to
10 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -11-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
dictate to the Respondents to provide such a facility to
the Appellants.
7. The second contention raised is that those replacing
the Appellants should not be themselves engaged on a
contractual basis. As far as this contention is concerned,
since the Appellants in any event do not possess the
mandatory NET qualification and, as such, cannot
continue, there is no requirement to consider the
submission as to how they are likely to be replaced."
From the perusal of the said order, it is clear that though, order
of the learned Single judge was not interfered with but same stood modified
accordingly when the finding was recorded by the Division Bench that
ineligible candidates cannot demand that they be allowed to continue in
service as per the policy dated 04.03.2020.
A similar question as raised in the present petitions was raised
before this Court in CWP-18958-2020 and the Coordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 07.09.2021 while interpreting Policy dated
04.03.2020 held that ineligible candidates cannot be allowed to continue in
service. The said order dated 07.09.2021 was assailed in LPA No.814-2021
titled as Amrit Kaur vs. State of Haryana and others so as to claim
continuity in service till ineligible candidates are replaced by regularly
selected candidates or qualified Extension Lecturers. The Division Bench of
this Court while hearing the said LPA No.814-2021 by way of an interim
order dated 10.11.2021 stayed the operation of the order of the Coordinate
Bench dated 07.09.2021. Said interim order dated 10.11.2021 is as under:-
"Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
11 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -12-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
Notice of motion.
Sh. Sharan Sethi, learned Additional
Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on
behalf of the appellants.
The operation of the impugned order is
stayed subject to the above directions since the
learned Single Judge does not appear to have
noticed the Clause in the Policy dt. 04.03.2020
which permits continuance of persons like
appellants if there is adequate workload and their
work is satisfactory.
It is not in dispute that there is adequate
workload, and that not even an advertisement has
been issued as of date by the respondents to
fillup the vacancies of the Lecturers pursuant to
Policy dt. 04.03.2020. Since the appellants had
been in service upto the date of the judgment of
the learned Single Judge under appeal; and since
even as per the Policy guidelines dated
04.03.2021, Lecturers would be allowed to
deliver lectures if there is sufficient workload
and their work is satisfactory; and since there are
no newly appointed Lecturers, the respondents
are directed to allow the appellants to work
continuously in the post they were holding on the
date of judgment of the learned Single Judge till
the State makes appointments of regular
Lecturers, who possess the qualification of
NET/Ph.D.
List on 22.02.2022.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the
files of connected cases."
Feeling aggrieved against the interim order dated 10.11.2021,
12 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -13-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
State of Haryana though, preferred a Special leave petition before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India but withdrew the same. Resultantly, Amrit
Kaur, who is similarly situated as the petitioners in the present petitions i.e.
non-qualified candidate, keeping in view the rules governing the service, is
being allowed to continue in service.
The prime contention of the learned State counsel is that
relieving of the petitioners is keeping in view the policy of the Government
of Haryana dated 04.03.2020. As per the respondents, subsequent to the
passing of the impugned order, the Division Bench of this Court have
already had an occasion to express opinion about the said policy dated
04.03.2020 and its implementation in a particular manner vide order dated
10.11.2021 in LPA No.814-2021. That being so, the respondents need to
examine the issue of relieving the petitioners afresh in the light of the
interim order dated 10.11.2021 passed in LPA No.814-2021 titled as Amrit
Kaur vs. State of Haryana and others i.e. as to whether petitioners who
are unqualified Extension Lecturers are to be allowed to be continued in
service till they are replaced by regularly selected candidates or the eligible
Extension Lecturers or not.
By way of interim order, operation of the impugned order was
already stayed and the petitioners are continuing in service keeping in view
the facts which have come into existence after filing of the present petitions
which have been noticed hereinbefore, hence, it becomes incumbent upon
the respondents to examine the issue whether ineligible Extension Lecturers
can be allowed to continue in service in case workload exists or till the
regularly selected candidates are appointed or candidates eligible as per the
13 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -14-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
rules are appointed in their place.
Let fresh consideration be given by the respondent-State
keeping in view the facts which have been stated hereinbefore including the
observation of the competent Court of law noticed hereinbefore and a fresh
order be passed within a period of 08 weeks from the receipt of this order.
Before parting, it may be noticed that teachers are the pillars of
the society and once the State Government has formulated certain rules
envisaging minimum required qualification for appointment, there has to be
a valid justification in not appointing regular selected candidates having
those qualification and continuing the ineligible candidates despite the fact
that there exist ample opportunity with the State to recruit the qualified
persons so as to teach the young generation which is to hold the future of
the country. As the respondent-State has informed that they have already
sent a requisition to the Commission for making regular appointment in
respect to the posts being held by the petitioners and the similarly situated
Lecturers, it will be in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of the
students that eligible regular Lecturers are appointed at the earliest to teach
the students so that they do not suffer in any manner. Respondents are
directed to expedite the selection of regular lecturers and it will be
appreciated in case selection process is completed in next 06 months.
Till fresh consideration is given by the respondents, the
petitioners, who are already working under the interim order passed by
Coordinate Bench, will be allowed to continue in service.
Writ petitions stand disposed of in above terms.
All the pending civil miscellaneous applications stand disposed
14 of 15
CM-13397-CWP-2022 & -15-
CM-13398-CWP-2022 in/&
CWP-14660-2020 (O & M) & connected cases
of.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected
cases.
December 07, 2022 (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
aarti JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
15 of 15
