The petitioners were appointed as Secretaries of the Union Councils in BS-5 on contract basis on 20.4.2007. The qualification required and possessed by the petitioners on that date was Matric at least in second division. The Govt. of Punjab S&GAD Department (Regularization Wing) vide Notification No. D.S (O&M) 5-3/2004/ Contract (MF) dated 14.10.2009 (Annex-D) was pleased to direct that all the Autonomous /Semi-Autonomous Bodies/Special Institutions in Punjab shall make the appointment on regular basis of the contract appointees in BPS-1 to 15 in line with Notification dated 14.10.2009 (Annex-F). The latter mentioned notification provides that the Chief Minister, Punjab was pleased to order the appointments on regular basis in relaxation of the relevant rules, of the employees recruited on contract basis against the posts presently held by them. These appointments were however, to be subject to the fulfillment of requirement of Rules 18 to 21-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974. The petitioners and others submitted Writ Petition 2733 of 2010 seeking the regularization of their services. During pendency of the petition, the services of 33 petitioners were regularized vide order dated 26.2.2011.
The petition was dismissed vide order dated 6.4.2011 to the extent of the remaining petitioners who now are the petitioners in the instant petition. The petitioners preferred ICA. No. 44 of 2011. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants sought withdrawal of the appeal and also of Writ Petition No. 2733 of 2010 with permission to present a fresh petition as it had been necessitated in view of the order dated 26.2.2011 having been passed by the competent authority regularizing the service of the successful contract employees. The learned Division Bench seized with the ICA allowed the withdrawal of the ICA and writ petition with permission to file a fresh petition.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners possessed the requisite educational qualification for appointment as Secretaries, Union Council. On the eve of the regularization of their services their cases have to be considered on the basis of their eligibility on the day of the initial appointment and the regularization of their services could not be conditioned with any added qualifications. The learned counsel for the petitioners refers to Punjab Local Council Service (Appointment and Conditions of Service Rules, 1983 wherein the required qualification is Matriculation. He submits that the amendment made in the Punjab Local Government District Service (Teshil/Town Cadre) Rules 2005 through notification dated 7.8.2007 requiring the qualification of F.A for appointment as Union Secretary is not applicable with retrospective effect.
He places reliance on "Secretary (Schools), Government of Punjab, Education Department and others vs. Yasmeen Bano" (2010 SCM R 739) to argue that the petitioners are entitled to regularization on account of their eligibility on the day when they were appointed on contract basis.
3. On the other hand, this petition is opposed by the learned Assistant Advocate General. It is contended that the petitioners on the basis of their eligibility at the time of contract appointment could continue as contract employees as long the parties mutually agree. Their regularization into service can only be ordered subject to fulfillment of the requirements of the Punjab Appointment and Conditions of Service Rules, 1974; that the petitioners do not possess the qualifications required under the Punjab Local Government District Service (Tehsil/Town Cadre) Rules 2005 as amended on 7.8.2007.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Assistant Advocate General and also gone trough the record.
5. The Notification dated 14.1.2009 directs that the Autonomous/Semi-Autonomous Bodies/Special Institutions in Punjab shall make appointments on regular basis, of the contract appointees in line with another even dated notification. The latter referred notification, conditions the regular appointment of the contract employees subject to fulfillment of the requirement of Rules No. 18 to 21-A of the Punjab Civil Servants (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1974. The referred rules make it imperative that a candidate for initial appointment to a post must possess the prescribed educational qualifications. The services of some of the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2733 of 2010 who possessed the required educational qualification introduced in the Rules 2005 ibid through Notification dated 7.8.2009 were regularized vide order dated 26.7.2011. The petitioners lacking the said added qualifications were refused the regularization of their services.
6. The qualification in vogue for the post of Secretary Union Council even on permanent basis was Matriculation on the day when the petitioners were appointed on contact basis. The appointment as Secretary on permanent or contract basis was to be made in BS-5. The first substantial difference inter-se both types of appointments is that of tenure of service, the second is of the pensionary benefits, which on the termination of service would be given in case of one and denied in case of the other. The amendment in Rules 2005 does not only require the added qualification of F.A, it also promises the appointment of Secretary Union Council in BS-7 instead of previous BS-5.
7. The term that should not be left undefined is the "Regularization" of the service Regularizing as defined in the Oxford English Dictionary is (1) making something regular (2) making a temporary situation legal or official.
In the Blacks Law Dictionary, Regular place of business and the regular course of business have been ascribed the meaning in contradiction to temporary place of business and in contrast to incidental or occasional business operations. The term "Regularization" is calculated to condone the irregularities. The Regularization, thus is not the de-novo appointment on regular basis of the contract employees subject to possession of newly stipulated added educational qualification. It is in fact the uninterrupted continuation of the service of the previous contract employees till the completion of their normal tenure. The act of regularization of service does not create a new job, it only removes the lurking fear. of sudden severance of their services. That makes their employment status equal to their contemporaries appointed on regular basis on the same day.
8. The amendment introduced on 7.8.2007 in the Punjab Local Government District Service (Tehsil/Town/Municipal Administration Cadre) Rules, 2005 does not take effect of their service will not be effected by it. The order dated 26.2.2011 refusing the regularization of the petitioners' services and disallowing the further extension of their contracts is held to be illegal and ineffective upon the rights of the petitioner, hence is set-aside.
9. Following the dictum laid down in "Secretary (Schools), Government of Punjab, Education Department, and others vs. Yasmeen Bano" (2010 SCM R 739) the services of all the petitioners who were eligible according to the requirement on the day of their initial appointment on contract basis would stand regularized. They will be entitled to all the benefit as mentioned in the notification dated 14.10.2009. This petition stands accepted.