LAWS(UTN)-2010-6-88

GOPAL RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Decided On June 18, 2010
GOPAL RAM Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the orders dated 4.12.2003 (contained in annexure nos. 8&9) passed by the respondent no.2 by which services of the petitioners were terminated and also for a direction to respondents to provide the benefit of Govt. Order dated 23.04.2003 to the petitioners.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated that in the year 1989 an interview was conducted by the Headquarter of U.P. Anushuchit Jati, Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam Limited, Lucknow and on the basis of that interview, the petitioners were selected. Accordingly, the petitioner no.1 was appointed on 29.08.1989 as Instructor (Carpenter) and the petitioner no.2 was appointed on 14.06.1989 on the post of Chaukidar in the fixed pay and both were posted at Badhaigiri Prashikshan Kendra (Carpentry Training Center), Nainital. Since the date of initial appointment, the petitioners are continuously working in the Department. It is stated that the petitioners are class IV employees, but they were assigned additional work from time to time. After creation of the State of Uttarakhand, the Uttarakhand Bahuddhesiya Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam was established in the State and on the basis of their option, vide order dated 21.05.2002, the Managing Director of U.P. Anusuchit Jati, Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam relieved the petitioners for the Uttaranchal Bahuddhesiya Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam. It is asserted in the petition that vide order dated 16.08.2002, the respondent no.2 directed the respondent no.3 to assign work to the petitioners however, the petitioners were already working continuously in the office of the respondent no.3 on the post of Recovery Assistant and Chaukidar respectively. In the year 1996, the Carpentry Training Centres in the State of U.P. were closed and thereafter, the Managing Director, U.P. Anusuchit Jati, Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam passed order on 31.07.1996 for the adjustment of the employees of those training centres, which were closed, to the District Office of the U.P. Anusuchit Jati, Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam against the vacant posts. In pursuance of this Govt. Order, the petitioner no.1 was posted on the post of Incharge Recovery Assistant and the petitioner no.2 was posted on the post of Chaukidar at the District Office, Nainital. It is further stated in the petition that on 23.04.2003, the Secretary, Uttarakhand Govt. issued a G.O. for establishment of the District Offices of Uttarakhand Bahuddhesiya Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam whereby in addition to other posts, 13 posts of Recovery Assistant, 13 posts of Peon/Messenger and 13 posts of Chaukidar-cum- Sweeper were created. The petitioners are working under the establishment on the post of Recovery Assistant and Chaukidar respectively, which have been created vide Govt. Order dated 23.04.2003. Thereafter, all of a sudden the respondent no. 2 issued orders on 04.12.2003 by which services of the petitioners have been terminated.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent nos. 2 & 3, on the other hand, submitted that though as per the Govt. Order dated 23.04.2003 the staff of Carpentry Centre is to be absorbed against the created post in the District Office according to their pay scale, but the State Govt. in the said G.O. has not made arrangements of finance and in view of this fact the petitioners cannot be granted benefit of the Govt. Order dated 23.04.2003, however, when the financial arrangement is made, the petitioners shall be absorbed. This contention of the learned counsel for the respondents also finds place in paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit.