N S RAVINDRAN Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since short question is involyed with the consent of the parties the matter is taken up today and disposed of at this stage.

(2.) Petitioners admittedly were working as work charge employees with DDA. By mutual agreement between DDA and MCD services of certain colonies were transferred from DDA to MCD alongwith staff charged to these colonies. As a result thereof the service of all these employees including the petitioners were transferred to MCD. Petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging their transfer to MCD. It is contended that the petitioners are not working in this scheme which are transferred to MCD and therefore the petitioners are not liable for such transfer. It is also contended that even if the staff deputed on the scheme to be transferred is found in excess than the officials who rank senior in that category are to be retained and only junior most persons are to be transferred. Likewise in case of shortfall the same is to be made out from the overall seniority under each category and the person who rank junior most only are to be transferred. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent it is stated that all the employees, without any exception, who were working in this scheme have since been transferred and therefore as the petitioners were work charged employees for the said scheme and the scheme is no more available with the DDA, the question of retaining these petitioners with the DDA does not arise. Infact the only alternative could be to dispence with the services of the petitioners after the scheme with DDA was over and reliance was placed in the judgment of Supreme Court reported in AIR 199 SC 1445. The respondents have further clarified the position in the additional affidavit dated 23rd December, 1999 by slating as under :-

(3.) In view of the above position there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.