Contractual appointee has no right to continue in the post after expiry of contract unless reappointed or term is extended: J&K High Court

A contractual appointment comes to an end as soon as the period of contract expires and the contractual appointee has no right to continue in the post unless the appointing authorities decide to extend the term or re-appoint her, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court recently held (Nisha Sharma v. UT of J&K and others)..A Bench of Justices comprising Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Sindhu Sharma, therefore, dismissed a plea challenging a judgment passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Jammu Bench on February 12, 2021 by which the CAT refused to issue any direction for extending the term of the petitioner who was appointed on contractual basis.By the said dismissal order, the CAT had also refused to quash the advertisement notice issued by the respondent whereby two posts ofLady Assistant Zila Sainik Welfare Officer, one for Jammu and another for Srinagar were advertised..“It is well settled that a contractual appointment comes to an end as soon as the period of the contract expires. The contractual appointee has no right to the post or to continue on the post unless the authorities decide to extend the term or to reappoint him,” the High Court said. .The facts as revealed from the petition was that two posts of lady Assistant Zila Sainik Welfare officer were created, one each for Jammu and Srinagar in the Sainik Welfare Department vide Government Order No. 03-04-2007. The petitioner was appointed on April 23, 2013 as Lady Assistant against the available vacancy in Zila Sainik Welfare Office Jammu on contractual basis for a period of three years The contract was liable to be terminated even earlier if she became medically unfit and unable to perform her duties, if her work and conduct was found unsatisfactory and if there was deterioration in his/her personal discipline..On February 6, 2019, the respondent advertised the above post for fresh contractual appointment for a period of three years.The same was challenged by the petitioner who claimed that she should be allowed to function at least till she completes 12 years of service or attains the age of 60. The petition was, however, dismissed by the CAT on the ground that the appointment of the petitioner was only for a period of three years on contract basis and since the same or even the extended period has expired by efflux of time she has no right to continue on the post. .The submission of the counsel for the petitioner before the High Court was that though the service conditions of the petitioner provided that her appointment is on contractual basis for three years but the same could be extended and that the petitioner could serve for a maximum 12 years or till she attains the age of superannuation of 60 years..The Court, however disagreed, stating that the service conditions do not provide that the services of a contractual employee in all cases is liable to be extended or that it is mandatory to extend the service for a period of 12 years or till the candidate attains the age of 60 years"We find no error or illegality in the order of the Tribunal inasmuch as the conditions of the service relied upon by the petitioner are not mandatory in nature, more particularly when the appointment of the petitioner was contractual," the Court said..The Court also highlighted the fact that two posts of Lady Assistant Zila Sainik Welfare Officer were created with the sole object to give benefit to the widow of armed forces personnel, wife of ex-servicemen or wife of a serving armed forces personnel. The service conditions also provide that preference shall be given to ex-service women, widow of armed forces personnel, wife of ex-servicemen and wife of a serving armed forces personnel, the Court further noted. .“Since the creation of post is in social interest to mitigate the hardship of the widow of armed forces personnel/wife of ex-servicemen/wife of a serving armed forces personnel, it is necessary that opportunity to maximum number of ladies belonging to the said category is given so that most of such ladies get the advantage and it may not remain confined to one person," it was observed. The petitioner having already worked on contract basis for six years must, therefore, yield place for the new incumbent and if the respondent have initiated steps for appointment of a new person in her place on contractual basis, it is just and reasonable and in consonance with the objective of the scheme created by Sainik Welfare Department, the Court concluded. It, therefore, dismissed the appeal. .Additional Advocate Generals Aseem Sawhney and Raman Sharma pleaded the case on behalf of J&K. Advocate Ankesh Chandel appeared for the appellant. .[Read Order]