UNION OF INDIA Vs. KILOB SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents in this writ petition, which are six in number, had filed two OAs before the Central Administrative Tribunal. Four of them joined together in one OA and the other two were the applicants in the second OA. All the six respondents, who are working as casual workers on daily wage basis in CPWD, had made common prayer in the said two OAs, namely, they should be regularized in service. It was pleaded by them that they have been working on daily wage basis for number of years and because of their long service, their claim for regularization was justified. They also submitted that many such orders for regularization of the services of similarly situated persons in CPWD, even in respect of those who were juniors to the respondents herein, had been passed and on the strength of such orders those persons had been regularized. They, thus, submitted that non-regularization of the applicants amounted to invidious discrimination and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The circumstances under which the aforesaid order was passed in the year 2004, having regard to the legal position prevailing on that date, one may not have interfered with this order. However, during the pendency of this writ petition, the Supreme Court has made authoritative pronouncement, settling the controversy relating to regularization of such casual/daily wage workers, in the case of Secy., State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Uma Devi and Ors., (2006) 4 SCC 1.

(3.) It is the constitutional duty of the Government to fill the posts on regular basis after following the proper selection procedure in accordance with Rules.