Judgment 1. Since 1992 and 1994, there were two vacancies in the post of English Stenographer under the Judgeship of the District Judge, Darjeeling. A request was made by the District Judge, Darjeeling to the Public Service Commission to provide a suitable candidate. The request met with no response. As the judicial work of the Court was being hampered due to non-availability of Stenographers for such a long duration, a letter was written to the Public Service Commission on June 19, 1996 by the then District Judge, Darjeeling again requesting for appointment of qualified candidates for the post of two English Stenographers, Schedule 'B' at Darjeeling Judgeship. 2. The Public Service Commission wrote back on September 2, 1996 stating that no qualified S.C. candidate was available for allotment on the results of the English Stenographers Recruitment Examination, 1994. It was stated that the Commission may take care of the vacancy on the forthcoming results of 1995 Examination for which a separate requisition may please be sent to us. However, the Public Service Commission informed the District Judge that as the appointing authority, the District Judge could fill up such vacancies temporarily for a period of six months for the first time and then after a break, for another term of six months, if necessary, in terms of Regulation 7 of the West Bengal Public Service Commission (Exemption from Consultation) Regulation, 1955, under intimation to the Commission. 3. On the basis of this letter, the District Judge, Darjeeling intimated the Local Employment Exchange at Darjeeling for appointment of a Stenographer. A written test and stenography test was held for selection of the candidates, all of whom had been sponsored by the Local Employment Exchange. The Selection Committee was comprised of Senior Judges of the rank of Additional District & Sessions Judge and the Chief Judicial Magistrate of the Darjeeling Judgeship. 4. The writ petitioner/appellant was found one of the successful suitable candidates. The other was one Pradip Bhitri Koti also from the district of Darjeeling. By an order dated September 15, 1997, the then District Judge appointed both these persons as English Stenographers purely for a period of six months with effect from 22.9.97 in the scale of Rs. 1160-35-1540-45-l630-55-2070-65-2469-75-2610/- per month plus usual allowances, as admissible. 5. The other was one Pradip Bhitri Koti also from the district of Darjeeling. By an order dated September 15, 1997, the then District Judge appointed both these persons as English Stenographers purely for a period of six months with effect from 22.9.97 in the scale of Rs. 1160-35-1540-45-l630-55-2070-65-2469-75-2610/- per month plus usual allowances, as admissible. 5. It was made clear that the appointments were made purely on temporary basis for a period of six months in terms of Regulation 7 of the West Bengal Public Service Commission (Exemption from Consultation) Regulation, 1955 and that the appointment was liable to be terminated at any time without notice as and when eligible candidates were received from the P.S.C. and if the appointees were not even sincere, diligent or regular. It was also stated that the appointees would have no right to claim their absorption in the posts and also that they would liable to be transferred to any Court within the district of Darjeeling for which they would get no T.A. or any other allowance. 6. On the basis of this order of appointment, the petitioner appellant joined the post of Stenographer. The appointment of the petitioner as well as Pradip Bhitri Koti were intimated to the P.S.C. The appellant was said to have been performing her duties sincerely, efficiently and honestly to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer under whom she was working in the District Judge Judgeship. After a break of one day, since no names were forwarded by the P.S.C., the appellant petitioner's service were again extended for a further period of six months. This continued as no suitable candidate of the S. C. category had been sponsored by the Public Service Commission, West Bengal from the North Bengal Zone. 7. It appears that in the meanwhile Pradip Bhitri Koti was discharged as he had not been found to be competent. As far as the petitioner was concerned, by a letter dated March 10, 1998, the District Judge, Darjeeling wrote to the Public Service Commission stating the aforesaid facts and also giving the qualifications of the appellant petitioner including the fact that she was a resident of Darjeeling and her mother tongue was Nepali in which language the Court proceedings were being held and that she had good command over the English Language together with proficiency in shorthand and typing and that she also knew Bengali and Hindi. The P.S.C. was accordingly, requested to take necessary steps for absorption of the appellant in the regular appointment of an English Stenographer, Schedule B" in one of the two long standing vacancies lying under the Darjeeling District Judgeship. A similar letter was written on March 10, 1998, inter alia, to the Secretary, Judicial Department and the Secretary P.S.C. again. Neither of these letters met with any response. 8. The appellant made representations to the District Judge praying for her regularisation. On July 8, 1998, the District Judge, Darjeeling again wrote to the Judicial Department of the Government of West Bengal, to the Public Service Commission as well as to the High Court on its Appellate Side in which a request was made that the appellant should be regularised in her service having regard to the facts of the case and that' the Government of West Bengal be requested to approve and recommend her appointment in the interest of public service. Reference was also made to two decisions of the Supreme Court by the District Judge in terms whereof, according to the District Judge, the appellant was entitled to be regularised in service. 9. On the same date, a fresh order was issued absorbing the petitioner on a regular basis with effect from September 23, 1998 subject to the satisfactory report of her police verification and medical examination, if any. Copies of this order were sent to the various authorities. 10. By a letter dated July 30, 1998, the Public Service Commission replied to the earlier letters of the District Judge dated 10.3.98, 5.5.99 and 8.7.98 stating again that the P. S. C. was not able to give a qualified S.C. candidate on the basis of the English Stenographers Recruitment Examination. P. S. C., accordingly, approved the ad hoc appointment against the vacancy of the appellant. However, as far as the appointment of the appellant was concerned, it was said that the decision of the Supreme Court referred to by the District Judge did not in any way allow the regularisation of the appellant and that this would be violative of the notified Rules of Recruitment and violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. The District Judge was directed to reexamine the matter. 11. The District Judge was directed to reexamine the matter. 11. As far as the High Court was concerned, however, by a letter dated August 19, 1998, the request of the District Judge as contained in his letter dated 18.7.98 was endorsed to the Judicial Department of the Government of West Bengal with a request to move the Government in the Finance Department for accepting the appointment and approval of absorption of the appellant as Schedule 'B' English Stenographer in regular basis, as requested by the District Judge, Darjeeling. 12. It is not necessary to refer to the other correspondence engaged in by the District Judge with the authorities in this regard. The Public Service Commission, however, by a letter dated September 17. 1998 addressed to the Judicial Department of the Government of West Bengal acknowledged the factual situation, as narrated above as being correct. However, it was recorded that the Commission did not agree that the decisions of the Supreme Court cited by the District Judge were applicable to the case when there were notified Rules of Recruitment for filling up of the vacancies on the basis of competitive examination. According to the Commission, the reasoning of the District were not convincing. It was further stated that the order of the District Judge dated July 8, 1998 regularising the ad hoc appointment of the appellant was not correct as this would require a decision of the Government and the issuance of a notification. 13. Presumably, on the basis of communication on the part of the Judicial Department, the new District Judge, who was appointed, modified the earlier orders by extending the appellant's service for only a period of six months on ad hoc basis from 24.9.98 to 23.3.99 with one day's break and subject to the same condition as the earlier appointments. 14. The appellant moved a writ petition before this Court. In that. It was submitted that the appellant had a right to be appointed to the post which was reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The petitioner is a Scheduled Caste appointee and there is no dispute on that score. The appellant's services were continued by virtue of interim orders passed by the Court in the writ application. In that. It was submitted that the appellant had a right to be appointed to the post which was reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The petitioner is a Scheduled Caste appointee and there is no dispute on that score. The appellant's services were continued by virtue of interim orders passed by the Court in the writ application. The writ application was, ultimately, disposed of by directing "the authorities concerned to refer the matter before the Public Service Commission to hold interview for the purpose of regularisation of the petitioner's position in the post, she is now working. After consideration of her interview, she should be regularised in the said post in accordance with law within six weeks from the date of communication of the order taking into consideration that the petitioner did work in the said post for a long time. Until such interview is completed and the communication is made by the authority concerned, the petitioner shall continue on ad hoc basis in the said post". 15. The petitioner is aggrieved by this order and has preferred an appeal. The petitioner has stated that her initial appointment was strictly in terms of the rules. It is further submitted that she had been appointed against a vacancy from 27.9.97. 16. Regulation 7 provides as follows ; "7. It shall not be necessary to consult the Commission in regard to the selection for a temporary or officiating appointment to a post, if- (a) the person appointed is not likely to hold the post for a period of more than one year; and (b) it is necessary in the public interest to make the-appointment immediately and a reference to the Commission will cause undue delay; Provided that (i) such 'appointment shall be reported to the Commission as soon as it is made; (ii) if the appointment continues beyond a period of six months, a fresh estimate as to the period for which the person appointed is likely to hord the post shall be made and, reported to the Commission; and (iii) if such estimate indicates that the person appointed is likely to hold the post for a period of more than one year from the date of appointment; the Commission shall immediately be consulted in regard to the filling of the post." 17. In this particular case, the Commission was consulted at all stages with regard to the filling of the post even under Regulation 7(b)(iii). The decision is reported in (1) Jacob M. Puthparambil v. Kerala Water Authority, AIR 1990 SC 2228 , is clear authority for the fact that appointments of employees by way of stop gap arrangement till regular appointments are made if continued for more than two years must be regularized provided the candidate possesses the requisite qualification. 18. It is nobody's case that the petitioner's initial appointment was contrary to the relevant regulations or that the petitioner is not' otherwise qualified to hold the post. In Jacob's case, the Supreme Court held that continuous employment which were broken by artificial breaks' were to be ignored. In this case, there is no candidate selected by the Public Service Commission till date. The need for Stenographer cannot be over stated having regard to the several desperate letters written by the District Judge, Darjeeling. As also observed in the Puthparambil's case "The sphinx-like silence on the part of the State Government for now over three years from the date of the resolution is indeed disturbing and betrays total lack of concern for this pressing human problem". 19. The Supreme Court in Puthparambil's case directed that all the ad hoc appointees who had served for more than 2 years and possessing the requisite qualifications were entitled to have their services regularised and regularisation was directed. In respect of those who bad worked for a period of one year or less, the different courses were directed in dealing with these persons. The Supreme Court's orders would not only govern the petitioners before Their Lordships but also all other similarly situated including those who may be party to the other proceedings pending before the other Courts". 20. According to the, learned Counsel for the State-Respondents, the decision in Puthparambil’s case had been limited in the subsequent decision of (2) Dr, Arundhati v. State of Maharashtra & Ors" AIR 1985 SC 962 . In that case, the petitioner had not been initially appointed in accordance with rules. The rules provided that appointment could be only by nomination of transfer. The petitioner was not appointed by either of these two methods. Secondly it required that an appointee had to spend sometime on probation. In that case, the petitioner had not been initially appointed in accordance with rules. The rules provided that appointment could be only by nomination of transfer. The petitioner was not appointed by either of these two methods. Secondly it required that an appointee had to spend sometime on probation. The petitioner did not fulfil this conditions either, It was also found that an advertisement had been made for regular selection through the Public Service Commission and a person had been found fit. When the post was advertised again during the pendency of the petitioners temporary tenure, the eligibility criteria had also changed. 21. The case is distinguishable on facts. The position in law has been clearly reiterated by a Bench of Three Judges of the Supreme Court in (3) Ashwani Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1997 SC 1628 . There the Supreme Court had to consider the case of regularisation of the services of 7000 daily rated Class III & Class IV employees, who had been appointed illegally by an Officer of the Department of Health in the Government of Bihar. The Supreme Court in dealing with this issue stated at Paragraph 13 of the Report that the question of regularisation in any service including in Government Service may arise in two contingencies. Firstly, if on any available clear vacancies which are of .long duration appointments are made on an ad hoc basis or daily wage basis by a competent authority and are continued from time to time without artificial breaks and the services are otherwise required such employees may be regularised. It was emphasized that the precondition was that the initial entry of such employee must be made against an available sanctioned vacancy by following the rules and regulations govern such entry. The second type of situation envisaged by the Supreme Court, and which is not relevant for the purpose of this judgment, relates to the regularisation of employees when there was a flaw in the procedure for the initial ad• hoc appointment. Each of the criteria mentioned in. The second type of situation envisaged by the Supreme Court, and which is not relevant for the purpose of this judgment, relates to the regularisation of employees when there was a flaw in the procedure for the initial ad• hoc appointment. Each of the criteria mentioned in. Ashwani Kumar's case have been fulfilled in the appellant's case :- (1) There was a clear available vacancy of long duration ; (2) Appointment was made on ad hoc basis by a competent authority in terms of the relevant regulations; (3) The appointment was continued from time to time for a long period of time with artificial break: (4) The appellant's service are otherwise required by the District Judgeship. 22. All the preconditions being fulfilled we are of the view that the appellant is entitled to have her appointment regularised in terms of. the request put forward by the High Court referred to in the letter dated August 19, 1998 to the Secretary of the Government of West Bengal, Judicial Department. 23. Needless to say that as far as the order dated July 8, 1998 is concerned, by which the District Judge sought to regularise the appointment of the appellant himself it cannot stand. In our view, he was not entitled to do so without following the procedure prescribed for making final appointment. 24. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of by setting aside the order under appeal in so far as it required the appellant to be interviewed afresh by the Public Service Commission and be considered by the Public. Service Commission for appointment. The role of the Public Service Commission is merely recommendatory and recommendations are normally acted on by the Government. That recommendation, in the facts and circumstances of this case, has been rendered redundant. Accordingly a direction is issued on the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to take all steps to regularise the petitioner-appellant's appointment within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order. In the meantime, the appellant shall continue in the service, as directed by the learned Single Judge. Let xerox plain copies of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be made available to the learned Advocates for both the parties, on their usual undertakings. Pal, J. Bhattacharjee, J. S. K. G.