Instructors Appointed By Local Committee Are Not Entitled To Protection Available To Public Servants Under Article 311: P&H HC
Considering the absence of regular availability of work and the fact that Petitioners not being government employees have to abide by the terms and conditions of the local level IMC, the Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected the Petitions of instructors & clerks employed by local Institute Management Committee seeking regularization of their services.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal clarified that “The petitioners are not the government employees, they have been appointed at a local level by the IMC and hence they have to abide by the aforesaid terms and conditions. They are not entitled to protection available to the Public Servants under Article 311 of the Constitution of India”.
Advocate Ranjit Singh Kalra appeared for the Petitioner, whereas Senior Advocate S.K. Sharma appeared for the Respondent.
In a brief background of the case, the Union of India came out with a scheme to upgrade 1396 Government Industrial Training Institutes through the Public Private Partnership. Under the said scheme a tripartite MoU was signed while giving interest free loan of Rs 2.5 crore by the UOI to the Institute Management Committee (IMC). As per the agreement, the IMC was given the powers to run the Government Industrial Training Institutes with the minimum interference of the Central or State Government. The petitioners had been employed as instructors and clerks (Class III) by the local IMC. Through these petitions, the Petitioners prayed for the regularization of their services or their conversion to a contract basis and issuance of a direction to ensure the payment of their salaries at the rates agreed upon by the State of Punjab with the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India. Furthermore, as an interim measure, the Petitioners have prayed to restrain the Respondents from imposing breaks in service, including mid-academic breaks and to grant them the same leave facilities as their counter parts in the Technical Education Department.
After considering the submission with respect to lifting of corporate veil and declare the Petitioners to be the government servants entitled to regular pay-scale, regularization and other service benefits, the High Court held that the Petitioners were not entitled to any relief as they were not the government employees and they had been appointed at a local level by the IMC and hence they had to abide by the aforesaid terms and conditions.
The High Court considered the stand of the State that the engagement of the instructors depended upon the availability of the work during intermediate durations, hence, in absence of the regular availability of the work, no direction as prayed for can be issued to them.
The Bench found that the services of the Petitioners have been engaged by the IMC for a particular duration of time only, and they were neither appointed as the government servants nor they were engaged against any regular civil post.
Moreover, the Bench observed that the concept of lifting of veil cannot be invoked in the present case, particularly when the Petitioners have been employed under the specific contract created by the IMC.
Noting that the Petitioners were not party to the memorandum of agreement, the Bench concluded that for the enforcement of a contract, filing of the writ petition is not the proper remedy.
Cause Title: GOVERNMENT ITIs CONTRACT EMPLOYEES UNION PUNJAB and ORS v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS [Neutral Citation: 2023: PHHC: 080914]
Click here to read/download the Order
