JITENDER KUMAR Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in these writ proceedings claims a direction to the respondents to confer upon him temporary status, based on a scheme titiled the Casual Labourers (grant of temporary status and regularisation) Scheme of 1989. The Petitioner claims to have been appointed by respondent BSNL in its establishment at Gurgaon sometime in 1998. He has produced copies of certain documents purporting to be attendance sheets. He also relies upon some certificates said to be issued by the officials of the BSNL.

(2.) Mr. Ranjit Sharma submits that the petitioner continued to work in the establishment of BSNL at Gurgaon till 29.6.2001 when without issuing any formal or written order, his services were dis-continued.

(3.) Learned counsel has taken me through the scheme of 1989. He submits that the petitioner had put in more that the requisite period of services which entitle him to temporary status. As per para 5 of the scheme, casual labourers currently employed, who had rendered continuous service of at least one year out of which they must have been engaged for work for 240 days were entitled to be designated as temporary mazdoors. Learned counsel submits that the respondents have taken an untenable stand that the petitioner was never with their employment. He submits that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the disputes in these proceedings and it would not be expedient to the petitioner to avail remedies under the Industrial Disputes Act.