SURESH KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners were working in the Central research Institute for Yoga (respondent No. 2) and have challenged in this writ petition the action of the said Institute in not absorbing them in regular service.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that petitioner No. 1 was appointed April 8, 1981 as an Attendant by respondent No. 2 on daily wages with effect from April 2, 1981. Petitioner No. 2 was appointed as a Sweeper vide order dated October 29, 1984 by the said Institute on daily wages. Similarly, petitioner No. 3 was appointed on January 19, 1982 on daily wages as a Peon by the said Institute. It is the case of the petitioners, and this is not denied by the respondents, that the petitioners continued to work on daily wages till their services were ultimately terminated on December 11, 1987 after filing of the present writ petition.

(3.) AT the time when the petition was filed the grievance of the petitioners was that the respondent-Institute advertised in the newspapers on February 1, 1987 a number of posts including the posts of Peons and Sweepers. It appears that interview letters were issued, but one of the petitioners was not even called for interview. The interviews were to be held on December 7, 1987. The case of the petitioners is that the respondent-Institute is a 'state' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, and as the petitioners have put in more than 240 days of work in a year, they are liable to be absorbed in regular service in view of the numerous decisions of the Supreme Court.