ANIL KUMAR Vs. GOVT OF NCT DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were working as ad-hoc Group 'C' employees in Delhi Energy Development Agency (DEDA) which is an autonomous body under the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi. They joined the said department in the year 1993. As they had not been absorbed in the posts in which they were working, they filed a writ petition in this Court bearing title Bijander Singh and ors. vs. NCT of Delhi and Ors. (WP(C) No. 467 of 1998) seeking absorption. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 7th November, 2001 with certain directions to the Government of NCT, Delhi, indicating broadly as to how and in what manner petitioners along with others were to be considered for absorption against the posts in which they were working on ad-hoc basis. The directions relevant to the disposal of the writ petition are as under:-

(2.) Pursuant to the directions, the Government of NCT of Delhi, through the Principal Secretary (Services) conducted a typing test in which the petitioners also participated. However, none of the petitioners could qualify the test. As such, they were not regularized in Group 'C' posts but were accommodated in Group 'D' posts and have even been absorbed in those posts. After having accepted their appointments in Group 'D' posts, they filed a contempt petition in this Court alleging violation of order dated 7th November, 2001. The same was disposed by an order dated 8th January, 2004 holding that no contempt was made out. It will be appropriate to reproduce the relevant part of the contempt order:

(3.) The present writ petition is virtually a repeat of what was alleged by the petitioners in the contempt petition. It is contended that the order dated 7th November, 2001 has not been complied by the Government of NCT of Delhi in 'letter and spirit'. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners ought to have been given preference vis a vis the fresh candidates while filling the posts of Group 'C' posts keeping in view of their educational qualifications and experience. In other words, it is submitted that they should not have been put through the same rigors of typing test which candidates who did not have similar experience as the petitioners were required to undergo. The order dated 7th November, 2001 is being sought to be interpreted to mean that the petitioners were to be regularized in Group 'C' posts solely on the basis of their educational qualifications and experience notwithstanding the fact that they failed to qualify the typing test not once but twice.