(1.) Petitioner claims to have been appointed as Electrician by the respondent No. 3 on May 23, 1990 on daily wages basis at the rate of Rs. 54 per day. Petitioner further claims that he was continued to work as Electrician on the above basis till July 31, 1992, on which date his services were terminated. He has accordingly filed this writ petition for quashing the order of termination of his services for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularise his services and absorb him in the department on regular basis and pay him the salary equivalent to the salary of regular employees.
(2.) In support of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner has made three submissions, viz., (i) the petitioner falls within the definition of workman and has completed service of 240 days and as such he is entitled to be regularised by the respondents; (ii) in any case, the petitioner has worked on daily wage basis for about two years and in pursuance of the Government Order and the law laid down by the Courts his service is liable to be regularised by the respondents, and (iii) after completion of 240 days of service his service cannot be terminated without complying with S. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
(3.) A person who is appointed on daily wages on ad hoc basis does not have any right to the post and his services can be terminated at any time. He cannot claim regularisation of his services merely because he has completed 240 days in service. In this connection reference may be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Development Horticulture Employees Union v. Delhi Administration, 1992-II-LLJ-452, wherein, while rejecting similar argument it was laid down as follows (p.459):