PRAYAGRAJ, Sept. 29 -- Taking a serious note of the huge number of contractual and ad hoc appointments in government medical and nursing colleges, the Allahabad high court has directed the director general, medical education and training, UP, to file a personal affidavit apprising the court of the number of vacant posts of professors in all medical colleges in the state. During the hearing, the state government counsel informed the court that a proposed "Uttar Pradesh Nursing College, Teacher, Service Rules, 2026 (Draft)" had already been prepared and forwarded to the government for approval regarding regular selections. Observing that there is a "pathetic state of affairs regarding appointments", Justice Siddharth Nandan directed the state government to prioritise the Draft Rules, 2026, to ensure regular selections are made as soon as possible. The court ordered listing the case for further hearing on October 13. The court passed these directives after noticing that there are more than 500 postings on a contractual basis across Uttar Pradesh, with hardly 2 to 3% reflected on a regular basis. The court directed the director general to include details of requisitions sent, advertisements issued, current statuses, and reasons for unadvertised vacancies despite requisitions. The director general must also state whether posts filled by officiating principals have been advertised. The order was passed on September 22, while hearing a writ petition filed by Srinivasan Gandhi, principal-cum-professor of Government College of Nursing, Badaun. The petitioner challenged the order dated June 3, 2025, which cancelled his contractual appointment pursuant to a government order dated April 15, 2022, restricting contractual appointments beyond three years. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Manish Gupta and another Vs. President, Jan Bhagidari Samiti and others (2022), the petitioner's counsel argued that an ad hoc employee cannot be replaced by another ad hoc employee and can only be replaced by a regularly selected candidate. Directing that the petitioner shall not be compelled to relinquish the post or be relieved, the court observed: "There is no issue with the GO dated April 15, 2022, which acknowledges that a contractual appointment must not continue beyond a maximum period of three years but at the same time, continuing the said ad hoc period for a virtually indefinite period, also cannot be in the interest of justice or the medical institution itself, as the possibility of exploitation of the said contractual employees cannot be ruled out. "Recently, the Apex Court in the case of Jaggo Vs. Union of India, reported on 2024 INSC 1034 has also held that such a practice is violative of Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution of India," the court said....