The Supreme Court has emphasized and also clarified that an ad hoc employee can not be replaced by another ad hoc employee, can only be replaced by a regularly appointed candidate.
The Court observed, “It is a settled principle of law that an ad hoc employee cannot be replaced by another ad hoc employee, can be replaced only by another candidate who is regularly appointed by following a regular procedure prescribed.”
A Single Bench granted them relief by directing that they should be allowed to continue to work on their respective posts till regular selections were made. The Single Bench direction was set aside by a Division Bench on State’s appeal. This led the appellants to approach the Supreme Court. This observation for the appellants appointed as guest teachers on a contractual basis under the “Jan Bhagidari Scheme” in Madhya Pradesh.
The Supreme Court observed and urged by the State that the appointments were as guest lecturers and not as ad hoc employees, it was clearly seen that the appellants were appointed on an ad hoc basis. The court did not find any error in a single judge’s direction directing the petitioners to continue to work on their respective posts till regular selections are made.
However, the Bench has also issued direction by the court that the petitioners would be entitled to get the salary but not in accordance with the UGC circular as the advertisements clearly provided that the selected candidates are determined by the Jan Bhaghidari Committee.
The Court has held that the appellants would be entitled to continue in their respective posts till they are replaced by regularly selected candidates.
