DR.KAILASH SARAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. (D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W) NO.226/09) 1 DR.KAILASH SARAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. (D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W) NO.226/09) Dated:- 4.3.2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr. Bheem Kant Vyas, for the appellant. 1. This special appeal is directed against order dated 11.12.08 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant assailing the validity of order dated 12.5.06 terminating his services , stands dismissed. 2. The appellant was appointed as Medical Officer vide order dated 12.11.99 issued by Chief Medical & Health Officer, Hanumangarh on ad hoc basis till 31.3.2000 or availability of candidates duly selected by the Rajasthan Public Service Commission. While working on the post of Medical Officer as aforesaid on ad hoc basis the appellant was selected for Surveillance Medical Officer ( in short “SMO”) in the National Polio Surveillance Project India ( in short “NPSPI”) by the World Health Organisation. The appellant made an application to the Additional Director, Directorate of Medical & Health Services , Rajasthan,Jaipur seeking permission to allow him to work in NPSPI on deputation. Admittedly, without the permission being DR.KAILASH SARAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. (D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W) NO.226/09) 2 granted , the appellant joined on the post of SMO in NPSPI. Later, vide communication dated 27.4.04 sent by the Deputy Chief Medical & Health Officer , Sub-division, Suratgarh district Sri Ganganagar, the request of the appellant for sending him on deputation was rejected and he was directed to join the duties . Vide reminder dated 21.6.04 the appellant was again directed to join his duties with the clear stipulation that his failure to join duties will entail disciplinary action against him. The notice was also published in the daily newspaper. But the petitioner did not care to join his duties and ultimately vide order dated 12.5.06 his ad hoc services were brought to an end in terms of Rule 86 (3) of the Rajasthan Service Rules. 3. The learned Single Judge opined that in absence of any order of the competent authority sanctioning the leave or an order sending the appellant on deputation , his joining the new assignment as SMO in NPSPI, Vaishali, Bihar amounts to abandonment of service and therefore, the respondents were justified in terminating his services. 4. Admittedly, the appellant was only accorded ad hoc appointment on the post of Medical Officer till the availability of the candidate duly selected by the RPSC. It is also not in dispute that the request of the appellant to send him on deputation to NPSPI was categorically refused. That apart, he was time and DR.KAILASH SARAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. (D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W) NO.226/09) 3 again directed to join his duties on the post of Medical Officer but, he did not care to join his duties apparently for the reason that he wanted to continue as SMO, Vaishali, Bihar. The appellant, an ad hoc appointee joining the services of other organisation without there being an appropriate sanction of the competent authority and not joining the duties despite repeated directions being issued, certainly amounts to abandonment of service . In this view of the matter, in our considered opinion, the authority concerned was absolutely justified in terminating the services of the appellant in terms of Rule 86(3) of the RSR. That apart, regular post in the cadre have to be filled in by way of regular recruitment process and the appellant, an ad hoc appointee for specified period has no right to claim continuance on the post for indefinite period. 5. For the aforementioned reasons, in our considered opinion, the learned Single Judge has committed no error in passing the order impugned dismissing the writ petition, warranting interference by us in this intra court appeal. 6. In the result, the special appeal fails, it is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (SANGEET LODHA),J. (A.M.KAPADIA),J. ADITYA/-