Turning down the petitions of as many as 30 applicants teaching on the contractual basis at Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology (CCET) contending to regularise their services instead of appointing new recruits, Chandigarh Administrative Tribunal observed they were appointed on specific terms and conditions, from which now they can’t escape.
CAT in its order stated that applicants have to make way for regular appointees through the UPSC. Moreover, they can’t claim to be allowed to continue on contractual appointment for all times to come.
The applicants had sought directions to be given to the UT administration and principal of Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology by CAT to regularise their contractual services against which they are working in view of the fact that now rules have been framed and there are sanctioned and vacant posts.
As many as 30 applicants, including Parul Aggarwal of SAS Nagar, Jaspreet Kaur of Patiala, Ashish Kalia of Sector 26, Rajiv Kumar of SAS Nagar, Sugandha of Sector 43B, Jagreet Kaur of Sector 51B, Bikramjit Kaur of Sector 33A, Seema Bansal of Zirakpur, Sheetal Dabra of Amravati Enclave, Rajesh Sharma of Sector 38A, etc had appealed for regularisation of their posts in the aforesaid college.
The applicants stated that in pursuance of various public notices and advertisements, the Chandigarh College of Engineering and Technology invited applications for filling up various posts for faculty of said colleges on contract basis, including one dated April 7, 2013, following which they had submitted their applications and were appointed as such on contract basis.
They further averred that at that time, the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement was same as prescribed by the All India Council of Technical Education, as no statutory rules governing the posts were available. Though their initial appointment was only for six months, it was extended from time to time.
The applicants also requested for framing of recruitment rules so that they could be regularised and get promotions, etc but to no avail.
Since they were under apprehension that their services may be dispensed with, they approached the Tribunal for issuance of directions to the college and the UT not to replace them, and allow vacations or leaves at par with the regular employees.
Meanwhile, the college officials contended that the applicants were engaged on contract only for a limited period and, as such, they have no right for regularisation. The post against which regularisation is sought is a Group A post which includes post of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, assistant professor in applied sciences and senior librarian for which administration is not competent to make regular appointment without the recommendations of the UPSC. It was also stated that no promise was made to the applicants that they would be regularised on their job.
Supporting the decision of the college and the UT, CAT stated the applicants have to make way for regular appointees through the UPSC.