COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE AND ENTERTAINMENT Vs. VED PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An order dated 12/12/2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 933/99 allowing the Original Application filed by the respondents herein is in question in this petition. The basic fact of the matter is net in dispute. The respondents had been working as Safaiwala in the Office of the Commissioner of Excise and Entertainment.

(2.) However, M/s Evershine House Keeping Services was engaged as contractor for doing the said job. According to the respondents, they had been working since 1995-96 continuously without break and thus they are entitled for temporary status having completed 240 days of service in a calendar year. The case of the petitioners, however, on the other hand was that the said respondents had never been appointed by the Commissioner of Excise and Entertainment and in fact, they were the employees of the said contractor.

(3.) The learned Tribunal, without deciding the question as to whether the respondents were employed by the petitioners or not, held that as the work in question is perennial in nature and not seasonal, their services were bound to be regularized. It was held: