(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularise the services of the applicant from the date of his initial appointment and absorb him regularly as Forest Watcher with consequential benefits and to disburse to him arrears of salary.) The petitioner has filed O.A.No.1073 of 1998, seeking for a direction to the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment and absorb him regularly as Forest Watcher with consequential benefits, including disbursement of arrears of salary. In view of the abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this court and was renumbered as W.P.No,33257 of 2006. On notice from the Tribunal, the respondents have filed a reply affidavit, dated 18.2.98.
(2.) PENDING the original application, the Tribunal gave a direction to pay the petitioner his pay and allowances for the months that he had worked and also not to terminate his service. The said order was continued until further orders. Since the said order was not obeyed, the petitioner filed a contempt application in CA No,406 of 1998. In order to avoid the contempt, the respondents have complied with the interim order.
(3.) IN case of such adhoc appointments, the Supreme Court has negatived the claim for regularisation based upon the dictum laid down in Uma Devi's case. IN this regard, it is necessary to refer to the latest judgment of the Supreme Court in State of West Bengal and others Vs. Banibrata Ghosh and others reported in (2009) 3 SCC 250. IN this case, the Supreme Court also has held that the decision cannot be rendered on the basis of very sympathy and the fact that a person had continued in service in view of the interim order granted cannot also have any bearing on such case. It is therefore, necessary to refer to the paragraphs 26, 28 and 31 of the said judgment, which are as follows: