DHARAM PAL MALIK Vs. M C D

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Writ Petitions have brought to light yet another case of employees continuing to work on ad hoc or work-charged or temporary basis for almost one decade. In W.P.(C) 6335-45/2004 titled Anil Singh & Ors. versus N.D.M.C. decided on 11.2.2005 I had observed, not just with little anguish, that ad hocism has become the norm and not the exception.

(2.) Shri Nanak Chand, the Petitioner in WP(C) No.3330/2001, was appointed as a Section Officer in 1986, consequent upon the death of his Father, that is, on compassionate ground. It is his contention that whilst his was a regular appointment, the other persons who had been promoted as Section Officers in 1983 on ad hoc basis could not be placed on the same footing as the Petitioner. Shri Nanak Chand had filed a Writ Petition No.1853/1997 which was disposed of by Orders dated 9.5.1997 issuing directions to the MCD to consider the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Additional Director (Horticulture) along with other eligible candidates. Till date the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for this purpose has not been constituted. Eleven Petitioners in CWP No.7171/2002 & 3370-79/2005 have also ventilated their grievances that although they have been performing duties of Section Officers since 1983, they have not been promoted to the next stage, even after two decade or over twenty years. An alarming situation indeed !

(3.) During the pendency of these proceedings all the Petitioners in CWP No.7171/2002 have been assigned "Look After Charge" of the post of Assistant Director (Horticulture). Since Shri Nanak Chand had not been similarly assigned duties of Assistant Director (Horticulture), he had filed an application before this Court. By Orders dated 19.1.2005 Shri Nanak Chand has also been assigned 'Look After Charge' of the post of Assistant Director (Horticulture). The question of the Petitioner being treated differently to the other Section Officers has, therefore, been temporarily redressed.