SURESH KUMAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common claim has been made, common orders have been passed in respect of the petitioners, both the petitions are heard together and are being decided by this common order. Facts as have been mentioned in this order, are taken from W.P. No. 5144/2009. Grievance of the petitioners in these cases is that they were appointed w.e.f. 1.12.1990 and 1.4.1991 respectively in the department and were made to work as Assistant Grade-III. However, the juniors to the petitioners have been given regular appointment in the establishment of respondents whereas their claim has been rejected. Earlier the petitioners in both the writ petitions have come before this Court by filing writ petitions, which were disposed of with a direction to consider the claim of the petitioners. The orders impugned have been issued by the respondents mechanically without application of mind rejecting the claim of the petitioners, therefore, they have come before this Court by filing these two writ petitions.

(2.) It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that from the facts as were proved by the certificates, petitioners were engaged against the sanctioned posts. However, since they were working on daily wages and were never considered for regularization, proper screening of the cases of the petitioners was not done and in a very casual manner the order was issued saying that the petitioners are not entitled to be regularized and their services were dispensed with, therefore, a joint Original Application was filed by the petitioners before the Administrative Tribunal. Interim protection was granted directing that the services of the petitioners be not terminated. The said Original Application came on transfer to this Court after abolition of the State Administrative Tribunal and was disposed of. However, since the juniors of, the petitioners were regularized, writ petitions were required to be filed by the petitioners separately before this Court in which a direction was given to consider the cases of the petitioners. In alleged compliance of the order passed by this Court, only when contempt proceedings were initiated against the respondents for non-compliance of the order of this Court, impugned orders are issued saying that the petitioners cannot be regularized as their cases are distinguishable than the cases of those daily wagers, who were regularized. It is contended that such consideration of the respondents is not justified and as such the orders impugned are liable to be quashed. The petitioners are entitled to the relief of regularization with retrospective effect.

(3.) On service of the notices of the writ petitions, return has been filed by the respondents and it has been contended that in terms of the order passed by this Court in the writ petition so filed by the petitioners, consideration of the claim of the petitioners was done. This Court in W.P. No. 24207/2003 has directed to consider the cases of the petitioners in terms of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 419/2007. In view of the order passed by the Division Bench, the decision was already taken and communicated to the petitioners on 28.11.2007 vide Annexure R-2. This being so, in fact the petitioners were not to be treated at par with those, who were appointed against the post. The petitioners were appointed only as/labours and were assigned the duty as Security Guard, though there were no posts of Security Guard sanctioned in the establishment of the respondents. In terms of the law laid-down by the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Uma Devi and others, a policy was formulated by the State Government on 16.5.2007 for the purposes of considering the cases of those, who have rendered 10 years or more service on daily wages. Under the said policy, entire claim of the petitioners was considered. Since it was found that the petitioners were never engaged against any vacant post duly sanctioned in the establishment of the respondents, they were not found fit to be regularized. It is contended that merely because certain certificates were issued in respect of the petitioners by some of the officers, it was not to be held that the petitioners were appointed against any sanctioned post on daily wages. It is further submitted that these findings have been duly recorded and it has been pointed out to the petitioners that the employees referred by them were engaged against the vacant posts and the policy of the State Government. Needless to say that if the petitioners are found fit for regularization and are regularized, they will get all the consequential benefits of such regularization. Necessary exercise in this respect be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. With the aforesaid, the writ petitions are accordingly finally disposed of. There shall be no order as to cost.