http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: DR. SURINDER SINGH JAMWAL & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       17/07/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  JT 1996 (6)   725        1996 SCALE  (5)528

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted. We have heard counsel on both sides.      The controversy raised in this case is squarely covered by the  judgment of  this Court  reported in  J. & K. Public Service Commission  v. Dr. Narinder Mohan [(1994) 2 SCC 630] is not  in dispute  that the appellants were recruited on ad hoc basis  and have  been continuing  as such.  It is  their contention that  since they had put in more than 13 years of service they  are entitled  to regularisation of service and approached the  High Court for direction to regularise their services. The High Court has followed the ratio in the above judgment and  dismissed the  petition. In  the light  of the judgment of  this Court  the settled  legal position  now is that the  recruitment to  the service  should be governed by their appropriate  statutory  rules.  Under  the  rules  the regular recruitment to the posts shall be made by the Public Service Commission. Consequentially, the ad hoc appointments would be  only temporary  appointments de  hors  the  rules, pending regular recruitment without conferring any right to regularisation of  service. This  Court in  Narinder Mohan’s case (supra) had given the following directions:      Accordingly,  we   set  aside   the      directions issued  by the  Division      Bench of the High Court and confirm      those of he Single Judge and direct      the State  Government of  the J & K      to notify  the vacancies to the PSC      which would  process  and  complete      the   selection,    as   early   as      possible, within  a period  of  six      months from the date of the receipt      of this order. The State Government      should   on    receipt    of    the      recommendation,  make  appointments      in  the   order  mentioned  in  the      selection list  within a  period of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

    two  months  thereafter  Since  the      respondents have been continuing an      ad hoc doctors, they shall continue      till   the    regularly    selected      candidates are  appointed. They are      also   entitled    to   apply   for      selection.  In   case  any  of  the      respondents are  barred by age, the      State  Government  is  directed  to      consider the  cases  for  necessary      relaxation under  Rule 9(3)  of the      age qualification.  If any  of  the      respondents are not selected the ad      hoc   appointment    shall    stand      terminated with  the appointment of      the   selected    candidate.    The      direction sought  for by  Dr. Vinay      Rampal cannot  be given. His appeal      is accordingly  dismissed  and  the      State appeal is also dismissed. The      appeals of  the PSC are accordingly      allowed but  in  the  circumstances      parties are  directed to bear their      own costs."      Following  the  above  directions,  there  shall  be  a direction to the State Government to notify the vacancies to the Public  Service Commission within a period of two months from today.  On notification so made it would be open to the appellants to apply for regular recruitment. It would be for the PSC  to consider the respective claims of the candidates who  have  applied  for  and  to  make  necessary  selection according to  rules. On selection so made and recommendation made to  the State Government the State Government will make appointments as per rules within a period of two months from the date  of  the  receipt  of  the  list  of  the  selected candidates from the PSC. The PSC is directed to complete the process of  the selection  within a  period of  three months from the  date of  the receipt of the requisition. The State Government  after  receipt  of  the  lists  shall  make  the necessary appointments in accordance with law. Till then the appellants would  continue only  on ad  hoc basis  till  the regularly selected candidates are appointed.      It is obvious that the appellants have become barred by age for  the direct  recruitment. It  would,  therefore,  be necessary  that  the  State  Government  would    relax  the necessary age  qualification so  as to  enable them to apply for and seek recruitment through PSC.      The contesting respondents who have come on record have stated that  the panel stands expired during the interregnum due to  the order of suspension granted by this Court. Under these circumstances,  the life  of the panel is extended for the period during which the stay order is in operation.      The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs