HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral).
The petitioner has claimed regularisation of his services on completion of 240 days of service. It is asserted that petitioner was appointed on 1.4.1986 It is further asserted that the petitioner has completed more than three years of service and thus, his services deserve to be regularised.
In the written statement, it has been pointed out that the petitioner was appointed on adhoc basis as a stop gap arrangement for a period of six months and till the candidates recommended by the Haryana Staff Selection Board are appointed. Therefore, the services of the petitioner can be terminated at any point of time.
This writ petition was admitted on 17.1.1990 and the termination of the services of the petitioner was stayed. The writ petition was admitted in view of the judgment of this Court in Piara Singh v. State of Haryana, 1989 (1) PLR 396. The judgment in Piara Singh's case (supra) has since been set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a judgment reported as State of Haryana v. Piara Singh, AIR 1992 Supreme Court 2130. The State Government was directed to frame a policy for regularisation.
Subsequently, in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi, 2006 (4) SCC page 1, Hon'ble Supreme Court, while considering its earlier decision, held that the public posts can be filled only by inviting application and giving opportunities to all candidates. It was specifically held that mere continuity in service on the basis of interim orders, does not confer any right on an employee for regularisation of the services.
In view of the above, the present writ petition is dismissed.