Case Note & Summary
The petitioners were appointed on contract basis as Engineers, Accountants and Data Entry Operators under a scheme framed by the Union of India and implemented by the State Government for development of backward areas in various districts of Maharashtra. They challenged communications dated 28th June, 2016 and 30th June, 2016 which put an end to their services, and sought a direction to regularize their services. The court held that since the petitioners were appointed on contract basis and their appointments were not made after following the constitutional recruitment process, they have no right to regularization. The termination of their services upon expiry of the contract period was valid. The writ petitions were dismissed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Contractual Employment - Regularization - Petitioners appointed on contract basis under a scheme for development of backward areas - No right to regularization as appointments were not made after following constitutional recruitment process - Termination upon expiry of contract period is valid - Held that contractual employees cannot claim regularization as a matter of right (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners, who were appointed on contract basis as Engineers, Accountants and Data Entry Operators under a scheme for development of backward areas, are entitled to regularization of their services and whether the termination of their services by communications dated 28th June, 2016 and 30th June, 2016 is valid.
Final Decision
The writ petitions are dismissed. The communications dated 28th June, 2016 and 30th June, 2016 terminating the services of the petitioners are upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Contractual employment does not confer right to regularization
- Termination of contractual employees upon expiry of contract is valid
- No right to continue in service beyond contract period
- Writ of mandamus cannot be issued to regularize services without following recruitment rules
