PARESH MAHENDRABHAI VYAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus and/or anyother appropriate writ or direction to the respondent No.2-Project Manager (Hotel Projects), GIIC Ltd, Vadodara and respondent No.3-Managing Director, GIIC Ltd, Ahmedabad to make the appointment of petitioner as a permanent employee as a Technical Assistant as per his representation, dated 27.3.87 and also to declare the petitioner's termination illegal and further to direct the respondents to regularise the petitioner's services from his initial appointment and to give all consequential benefits flowing from said regularisation.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner has been appointed in Hotel Projects at Baroda which is a consultant agency owned by GIIC. The petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Engineer with effect from 9.9.1985 on probation on daily wages of Rs.20.00per day in the Hotel Projects under the Scheme of Development of Hotels in the State of Gujarat and thereafter the petitioner was appointed as Technical Assistant (Civil) on consolidated salary of Rs.700.00p.m. from 1.12.1985 for three months and his job was extended by the respondent No.2 upto 31.5.1986 and lastly the services of the petitioner were extended till 31.3.1987. As the petitioner's services were not continued he made representation to the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 15.4.87. In the petition it was alleged that the petitioner's services were not continued from 1.4.87 he made representations to respondents to continue his services from 1.4.87. It has been stated that originally the Hotel project was in Baroda and later on it was shifted from Baroda to Ahmedabad w.e.f.1.4.87.

(3.) On behalf of respondent No.3, one Mr.K.A.Trivedi, Manager (Law) has filed affidavit in reply wherein it has been stated that the Hotel Project is a Division of GIIC and functions to promote projects in joint sector arrangements. It has been stated that the Hotel project division of GIIC does not have any permanent post or quota post of Technical Assistant (Civil). It has been stated that the Hotel project staff is generally of temporary nature and on completion of any joint sector project, if any position is available in the joint company so floated, the staff can be transferred to such company. It has been stated that no temporary employee of the Hotel project division of the respondent corporation is taken as an employee of the corporation either on adhoc or regular basis after the termination. It has been stated that the Hotel project division is a temporary division only for the purpose of setting up of hotels and other allied projects and is not permanent set up of the corporation. It has been stated that the petitioner has been appointed as Technical Assistant on purely adhoc basis for a specific period and the said position is a work charge position which was not sanctioned by the corporation. It is denied that the petitioner was on probation on the post of Technical Assistant and he was appointed purely on temporary work charge basis and at no point of time he was a probationer. It stated that as there is no sanctioned post of Technical Assistant in the Hotel project division of the corporation, there was no question of regularising the services of the petitioner. It has been stated that there is no permanent Technical Assistant Post in the Hotel Project Division of the corporation and there is no question of appointing anyother person on the said post in place of petitioner. The petitioner has filed rejoinder denying all the said contentions. The respondents had filed further affidavit in reply dated 14.9.88 in which it was stated that the Hotel Project was a part of the Corporation on temporary basis and it has been closed down and the staff being on temporary basis have been relieved. It has been stated that the Hotel project cell was a temporary cell only created for the purpose of setting up of hotels and other allied projects. In the circumstances the Corporation decided to close down the Hotel project cell and the Project Manager who was employed on contract service has been relieved on expiry of his contract on 31.3.1988 and other employees were also relieved from service. It was therefore stated that the petitioner has no right to continue on the said post. Mrs.Megha Jani who had appeared on behalf of the GIIC has submitted that the project has been closed down and therefore the petitioner has no right to continue on the said post.