TEJU LAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner claims to be working in the government Mahila Polytechnic College, Ghamapur as Hostel Peon. It is claimed that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Work Shop Labour in the year 1983 against the vacant and sanctioned post and thereafter, continued to work in the said post. Vide order dated 20th March, 1989 he was regularized in the regular work charged and contingency paid establishment on the post of Hostel peon. Claiming grant of time bound promotion under the scheme formulated by the State Government vide Annexure P/3 dated 17. 03. 1999 and modified vide annexure P/4 dated 27. 02. 2001, the petitioner sought grant of benefit after completing 12 years of service. However, when representations were made and the same were not considered, the petitioner has filed this petition.

(2.) ON notice being issued, the respondents have filed a reply and the only objection of the respondents is to the effect that the petitioner is a contingency paid employee, therefore, the scheme contemplated for granting the time bound promotion as contained in Annexures P/3 and P/4 is not applicable.

(3.) IT is the case of the respondents that the scheme for time bound promotion is only applicable to employees who are working in the regular establishment and not to employees of the work charged or contingency paid establishment.