C.W.P No. 1022 of 2015
i working as lecturer in govt college from last 7 year on a contract so please tell me this case of copy is our favorable or not
please tell us i really worry this
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.W.P No. 1022 of 2015
DATE OF DECISION: 21.07.2016
Gagandeep Kumar and others ..........Petitioners
State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents
BEFORE:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY
1. Whether reporters of local newspaper may be allowed to
see judgment? (Yes/No)
2. To be referred to reporters or not? (Yes/No)
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present:- Mr. L.S. Sidhu, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Anshul Gupta, AAG, Punjab.
DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.
The case of the petitioners in the present petition is that they are
working against their respective posts since 2009-2010 but now they are
apprehending that they are going to be replaced by other contractual
Learned counsel has also relied upon the judgments of this
court in Sarjinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others
(C.W.P. No. 3613 of 2011, decided on 30.8.2011), Muskan Bhatia and
others Vs. State of Punjab and others (C.W.P. NO. 26116 of 2012,
decided on 21.12.2012), Deepinder Kaur and others Vs. State of Punjab
and others (C.W.P. No. 7113 of 2012, decided on 20.7.2012), Nitin
Khurana and others Vs. State of Punjab and others (C.W.P. NO. 2206 of 2012, decided on 6.2.2012) and Anchal Goyal and others Vs. State of
Punjab and others (C.W.P. No. 5256 of 2012, decided on 21.3.2012), in
support of his case.
Nothing is there on record to show that the petitioners are going
to be replaced with other contractual employees. Even in the written
statement, an objection has been raised that the petitioners have no right
over the posts. Merely an averment has been made in the petition that the
petitioners may be replaced with other contractual employees.
Admittedly, in response to the advertisement/public notice
issued by the respondents, the petitioners were engaged on contract basis for
one academic session and they were allowed to continue for the last
approximately five years. As on today, there is nothing on record to show
as to whether any advertisement has been issued or not for replacing the
petitioners with other contractual employees. No intimation has been sent
to any candidate, which shows that the petitioners are going to be replaced.
It is only an apprehension that the petitioners are going to be replaced.
Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with a direction
to the respondents that in case new/fresh advertisement is to be issued then
case of the petitioners be considered on priority as they are working on their
respective posts for the last approximately five years.
However, it is made clear that without considering the
petitioners or issuing any public notice, the petitioners be not replaced by
other contractual employees.
Disposed of accordingly.