IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 502 of 2008 a/w CWP Nos.550, 565, 567, 571, 574 and 708 of 2008 Decided on: 23.11.2010. __________________________________________________ 1. Lalit Mohan vs. State of H.P. & ors. 2. Zaffar Ali vs. State of H.P. & ors. 3. Monika Makkar vs. State of H.P. & ors. 4. Sharmila Sharma vs. State of H.P. & ors. 5. Arti Chandel vs. State of H.P. & ors. 6. Narinder Kumar vs. State of H.P. & ors. 7. Krishna Devi vs. State of H.P. & ors. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. For the petitioner (s) : Mr. Vikram Thakur and Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocates. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, A.G. with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Addl. A.G. for the respondents-State. Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate for respondent No.4 in CWP No. 708 of 2008. ___________________________________________________________ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral). The petitioners have been working as teachers on PTA basis. They are aggrieved and have approached this court when their services have been sought to be orally terminated by the Principal(s)/PTA Committee. Once the petitioners are appointed on PTA basis, their termination can be made only on the basis of guidelines and in terms of agreements executed by them. True, PTA appointment is an ad-hoc arrangement, till regular hand joins the post. But, the apprehension of the petitioners is that they are sought to be replaced by the sweet will of the Principal(s) or PTA Committee, by another PTA teacher. In the nature of scheme of appointment of the petitioners, we are afraid such a situation is not permissible. The petitioners having been appointed on ad-hoc basis 2 as PTA teachers, they are normally to be replaced only by regularly appointed/contract teachers. Unless on the ground of misconduct, they be not disturbed, until they are replaced by regularly appointed teachers, be it on contract basis or otherwise, so long as there is work available. Needless to say that so long as the petitioners have been working as PTA teachers, due and admissible remuneration shall be paid to them. 2. The writ petitions stand disposed of as above, so also the pending applications, if any. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice. (Justice V.K. Ahuja) November 23, 2010 Judge. (tilak/pankaj)