DR. ARUNDHATI AJIT PARGAONKAR versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

DR. ARUNDHATI AJIT PARGAONKAR versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Appointment to a permanent post on a temporary basis, even if continuous for several years, does not entitle a candidate to regularisation unless such regularisation is specifically provided for under the applicable recruitment rules or Government resolutions, and all prescribed conditions—including compliance with...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Dr. Arundhati Aiit Pargaonkar; Respondent: State of Maharashtra; Respondent: Respondent No. 3 (Dr. Satish B. Barale)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
31 August 1994
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Bombay
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Regularisation of Service, Appointment Through Public Service Commission, Temporary Appointment, Recruitment Rules
Service Law Regularisation of Service Appointment Through Public Service Commission Temporary Appointment Recruitment Rules

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Arundhati Aiit Pargaonkar

Appellant

State of Maharashtra

Respondent

Respondent No. 3 (Dr. Satish B. Barale)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Order of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Bombay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant, appointed temporarily against a permanent post, was entitled to regularisation under Temporary Government Servants Extension of Permanency Resolution, 1975, or any equitable principle after continuous service for nine years.

Ratio Decidendi

Appointment to a permanent post on a temporary basis, even if continuous for several years, does not entitle a candidate to regularisation unless such regularisation is specifically provided for under the applicable recruitment rules or Government resolutions, and all prescribed conditions—including compliance with the Public Service Commission’s process—are satisfied.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs.
  • Interim orders are vacated.