PRAMOD KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider their case for regularization on the basis of recommendation of the department and the scrutiny committee.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as mentioned in the writ petition, are that petitioner Pramod Mishra was appointed on the post of Time Keeper on daily wages on 1/10/1993 and was removed from service on 25/6/1997 by the Executive Engineer without affording any opportunity of hearing and without assigning any reason. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Labour Court and pursuant to the order dtd. 26/8/1998 of the Labour Court (Annexure P/5), he was appointed against the vacant post and thereafter, the Scrutiny Committee also recommended for his regularization. Since he had completed 240 days in service, he was entitled to be considered for regularization. The appeal preferred before the Industrial Court by the department was dismissed vide order dtd. 19/4/2005 (Annexure P/6). Petitioner Dilip Kumar Supkar was appointed as a daily wager against the vacant sanctioned post vide order dtd. 1/10/1990 and was retrenched by the department, which was challenged by him before the Labour Court. Vide order dtd. 22/7/1998 the Labour Court allowed the application of the petitioner and held him entitled for reinstatement vide Annexure P/7. The appeal preferred by the department was dismissed by the Industrial Court vide order dtd. 19/4/2005 (Annexure P/8). Though he was reinstated pursuant to the order of the Labour Court, but subsequently he was removed from service in April, 2000. So far as petitioner Chandra Pratap Tiwari is concerned, he was also appointed on the post of Sub-Engineer on 1/6/1993 and subsequently by order dtd. 16/11/1995 his services were terminated without any reason, which was challenged before the Labour Court. Vide order dtd. 23/5/1996 the Labour Court allowed the application of the petitioner and directed for his reinstatement. However, the appeal preferred by the department against the said order was allowed in part by the Industrial Court vide order dtd. 3/4/1999 whereby while upholding the order of reinstatement, the order of back wages was modified and it was directed that the petitioner is entitled for 50% back wages only vide Annexure P/9. As regards the petitioner Ratibhan Kushwaha, he was also appointed as a daily wager in the department on the post of Time Keeper on 1/12/1993 and subsequently, was removed from service, which was challenged before the Labour Court. Vide order dtd. 26/11/1998 (Annexure P/10) the Labour Court allowed the application of the petitioner and directed for his reinstatement.

(3.) All the four petitioners were reinstated in service but subsequently they were removed whereas they were entitled for regularization. The Scrutiny Committee constituted by the State Government also examined the cases of the petitioners for regularization and recommended for the same vide Annexure P/12. The department also sent the matter to the State Government but thereafter no order was passed by the State Government. Though the petitioners made several representations to the department for redressal of their grievance but of no avail. It is pertinent to mention here that one Sudhir Kumar Rana was appointed in the department as Stenographer/Typist and his case was considered and recommended for regularization but he was not regularized. Thereafter, he filed a writ petition i.e. WPS No.765/2014 before this Court which was disposed of with liberty to him to file a representation before the respondent authorities in this regard. Subsequent to the representation filed by him, he was regularized. He was also out of the job from 2000 to 2007. The case of the present petitioners is identical to that of Sudhir Kumar Rana and therefore, action of the respondent authorities in the matter of the petitioners is per se arbitrary, discriminatory and illegal. Hence this petition for the following reliefs: