While overseeing an investigation into the unlawful appointment of ad hoc lecturers in Puducherry, the Supreme Court recently exercised its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution. In a significant ruling, the Court directed the Union Territory government to regularize the services of 18 lecturers without requiring any involvement from the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). This decision underscores the Court’s commitment to ensuring justice and fair employment practices, even in cases where procedural irregularities have occurred.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan passed the order, stating,
“we also direct that all the 18 incumbent lecturers (15 + 3) be regularized by the Government of Puducherry without any involvement of the UPSC. This order is passed in exercise of powers conferred on us by Article 142 of the Constitution.”
The case involved three lecturers (Respondent Nos. 1 to 3) who were appointed on an ad hoc basis at Motilal Nehru Government Polytechnic College in Puducherry. Seeking regularization along with all consequential benefits, they approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench. The Tribunal ruled in their favor, emphasizing that similar relief had already been granted to other lecturers in comparable situations and that Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 should not be subjected to discriminatory treatment.
The High Court upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal’s (CAT) order. However, dissatisfied with the decision, the Union of India and the Directorate of Technical and Higher Education, Government of Puducherry, challenged it before the Supreme Court.
Upon reviewing the case records, the Supreme Court expressed concern over the "very sorry state of affairs" in Puducherry. It noted that, out of 51 sanctioned lecturer posts at the Polytechnic College, 45 were occupied by individuals appointed on an ad hoc basis. Among them, 15 lecturers had previously secured orders from CAT for regularization, which were upheld by the High Court and left undisturbed by the Supreme Court in 2007. Despite these rulings, their regularization was stalled as the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) refused to comply, citing its unwillingness to endorse the regularization of appointments deemed legally improper.
Expressing dismay over the non-compliance with its 2007 order, which had upheld the directive to formulate a scheme for regularizing all casual lecturers, the Supreme Court strongly criticized the UPSC’s stance. The Court remarked, "Audacious indeed, considering that an order of this Court is subsisting till date." It further noted that, in the past, the UPSC had regularized the appointments of ad hoc lecturers in other disciplines across different institutions in Puducherry, highlighting an apparent inconsistency in its approach.
The Court further observed that Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 had been appointed in 2005, while the relevant recruitment rules were introduced in 2006. However, the petitioner-authorities failed to provide any justification for not conducting the required recruitment process immediately after the rules came into effect. Meanwhile, the respondent-lecturers had been continuously serving since 2005—without any misconduct—and possessed the necessary qualifications for appointment as lecturers.
From a legal standpoint, the Court referenced Shripal v. Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad and reiterated that the ruling in State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi (3) could not be misused as a justification for allowing exploitative ad hoc engagements to persist for years without the employer initiating a proper recruitment process to deny the benefit of regularization.
Ultimately, recognizing that the authorities' reluctance to regularize the 15 lecturers who had previously obtained favorable orders could adversely affect the respondent-lecturers as well, the Court exercised its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution. It directed the Union Territory government to regularize the services of all 18 lecturers (the 15 previously affected and the 3 respondents) without requiring UPSC’s involvement.
info@adhwaitha.com