(1.) The petitioner, a retrenched employee of Census Department has instituted this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint/absorb him against any vacancy in the Census Department at Allahabad or in Collectorate or any other department of the Government. This Court issued an interim mandamus on 29.8.2000 directing the respondents to offer a suitable appointment to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order or show cause by filing counter-affidavit within that period as to why the reliefs claimed in writ petition be not allowed.
(2.) A counter-affidavit has been filed by Sri S. L. Yadav, Legal Advisor, Nagar Nigam, Allahabad stating therein that the petitioner had an opportunity to appear in an open selection alongwith other candidates but he failed to avail of the said opportunity on the strength of being a retrenched employee of the Census Department. Another counter-affidavit has been filed by Sri Nirmal Singh, Assistant Director in the office of Director of Census, U.P., Lucknow wherein it has been stated that the petitioner and some other candidates had filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Tribunal after hearing the matter issued a direction to the respondents to frame a scheme within three months for appointment/absorption/regularisation of 900 and odd retrenched employees of the Census Department. The employees, it is further stated in the counter-affidavit were not satisfied by the direction given by the Tribunal and therefore, they preferred Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court made it clear that the retrenched employees would have a right to be considered only if they fulfill other conditions laid down in the relevant service Rules. It is further stated in the said counter-affidavit that whenever direct recruitment is made in the Census Department vacancies are widely published in the news paper and the petitioner will have an opportunity to stake his claim for appointment as and when vacancies are advertised by the Census Department.
(3.) I have had heard Counsel for the parties and gone through the affidavits. It is not disputed that the petitioner had worked in connection with the census work under the Director of Census, U.P. and he is admittedly a retrenched employee of the Census Department. It would appear from the order dated March 21, 1997 Annexure No. 4 of the writ petition that certain retrenched employees of the Census Department were absorbed by the District Magistrate, Bhadohi in the offices under his control. The Government have issued orders from time to time for absorption of retrenched employees of the Census Department. The petitioner is eligible and qualified for appointment on a clerical post. In fact he was engaged on a clerical post in connection with the Census work. It cannot be accepted that since 1991 no vacancy has occurred in the Collectorate or other departments of the Government. The petitioner has been making applications for absorption but in vain. In my opinion the respondents were not justified in denying absorption to the petitioner on a clerical post. The petitioner, who is admittedly a retrenched employee of the Census Department is entitled to be appointed on a clerical post in the Collectorate or in any other department of the State and the respondents were not justified in subjecting the petitioner to the general selection for appointment by direct recruitment. The petitioner being a retrenched employee of the Census Department was entitled for absorption/appointment on the strength of his services rendered in the Census Department as per the Government Orders issued from time to time in relaxation of various terms and conditions of recruitment as visualized by Rule 3(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Absorption of Retrenched Employees of Government or Public Corporations in Government Service Rules, 1991.