RAM DHARI SINGH Vs. DELHI VIDYUT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Order the interim application filed by the Petitioner along with the writ Petition shall be disposed off. The prayers in the application are :-

(2.) The Petitioners are on the regular strength of the Delhi Vidyut Board (hereafter - DVB). In the petition it has been averred that the overwhelming Majority of deputationiste have been recruited by DVB contrary to its statutory Regulations and are continuing in the service of the DVB pursuant to extensions granted to them from time to time contrary to these very statutory Regulations, which reads thus: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_305_ILRDLH7_2001Html1.htm</FRM>

(3.) Details of 26 persons who are working in the subject post of Assistant Finance Officers (AFO) of which only three are apparently eligible have been stated in the writ petition. Out of these three persons, it appears that Shri J.K. Rastogi has been granted another extension on 26/9/2001 while the matter was actively sub-judice. This fact was brought to the notice of the Court by Mr. N.K. Kaul, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, and he has vehemently and justifiably taken, umbrage to this action. Consequent upon thia extension granted yesterday, Mr. Rastogi will now be working with the DVB for the fifth consecutive year. Half of the persons in the list of deputationists are from the Cement Corporation of India, a Company whose fortunes and operation are in the doldrums, a circumstance which certainly does not auger well even for the monopoistic DVB, whose own fortunes are fluctuating if not floundering and are in turmoil.