PRAKASH KUMAR SAINI Vs. M C D

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was working as a Mate in the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in a work charge establishment. Along with four other similar employees, he was appointed as a regular Assistant Sanitary Inspector (ASI) in the DDA on 26.11.1991 on the basis of the recommendations of a Selection Committee. It was stipulated in the said letter that the period spent by the work charge mates on work charge establishment "will be regularized as per the provisions of EO No. 130 dated 10.1.1991".

(2.) The aforementioned E.O. No. 130 dated 10.1.1991 is a communication by the Commissioner (Personnel) DDA informing that the Lt. Governor of Delhi/Chairman, DDA had been pleased to order that "all the work charge employees of the Delhi Development Authority would be treated as a part of the regular work charge establishment, with immediate effect".

(3.) Three years prior to this, in 1988, 44 resettlement colonies were transferred from the DDA to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). Consequently, some of the work charge Mates of the DDA were transferred to the MCD. These included the applicants in CM Nos. 11090-91/2006 who had been appointed as work charge Mates in the DDA in 1983. However, at the time of such transfer to the MCD, these work charge Mates had not been regularised as ASIs. In 1995, 382 residential colonies were transferred from DDA to the MCD and this resulted in a further transfer of several employees from the DDA to the MCD. The petitioner who was working as regular ASI with DDA was also transferred to the MCD in 1995 along with two other ASIs.