High Court rules out consideration of ad hoc service for promotion

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has clarified that ad hoc appointments made by an authority lacking the authorization to do so under the rules cannot be considered for determining the seniority of the employee. The court also expressed the opinion that employees selected through the state’s recruiting agencies, such as the public service commission or subordinate service selection board, hold a higher position in terms of seniority compared to ad hoc employees.

Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi passed these orders while deciding a batch of petitions filed by Pardeep Kumar Gupta and others, who are claiming the benefit of seniority by taking into account the adhoc service they rendered prior to regularisation of their services.

The petitioners were appointed as pharmacists on an adhoc basis on various dates, starting from October 1986 till August 1989. Their appointments were made as a stop gap arrangement on a temporary basis. However, later, the then Subordinate Staff Selection Board of Haryana made regular appointments of pharmacists in the state.
The petitioners in the present case are seeking seniority over all those selected after their appointments on the ground that their services were also regularised by the state government, thus they are entitled to seniority from the date of their initial appointment on an adhoc basis.

As many as 227 pharmacists were selected after the petitioners by the state’s recruitment agencies after the petitioners. After hearing their plea, the HC observed that the post of pharmacist, which is in question, was to be filled up through the Subordinate Staff Selection Board, as was done while making regular selections. However, when the initial appointment of the petitioners was not in accordance with law, the claim for the grant of benefit of seniority by taking into account the adhoc service cannot be granted.

“Even otherwise, the service of the petitioners was regularised under the instructions dated February 28, 1991, wherein certain terms and conditions were envisaged for regularisation of the services of the adhoc employees… the adhoc employees were to be only regularized from December 31, 1991,” observed the HC while dismissing the plea.
The high court said that in the regular selection process in question, 227 candidates were appointed and if the petitioners’ plea for seniority by counting adhoc arrangement period is accepted, they will gain seniority over all 227 direct recruits.