SALKHAN MURMU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 28.6.2005 passed in O.A. No. 350 of 2004 by which the Petitioner's claim for regularization/absorption has been rejected, but certain relief has been granted in view of the letter dated 18.6.1979 and Circular dated 30.12.1999 for inclusion of his name in the waiting list for one year and to renew thereafter as per the rules laid down for this purpose.

(2.) THE facts and circumstances of the case giving rise to the case are that Petitioner initially was appointed provisionally to the post of Extra Departmental Packer/MC, OSAP Campus, S.O. Bhubaneswar for a period from 12.4.1999 to 30.9.1999 or till regular appointments was made whichever period was shorter. The appointment letter dated 18.9.1999 further clarified that appointment could be terminated when regular appointment was made and he would have no claim for appointment to any post. It was also made clear that Petitioner will be governed by the Extra Departmental Agents (Conduct and Service) Rules, 1964. The Petitioner was again appointed vide letter dated 10.2.2000 for a period from 1.10.1999 to 31.3.2000. Similar appointment letters had subsequently been issued on 26.5.2000, 6.9.2000, 25.10.2000, 7.2.2001, 1.5.2001, 1.11.2001, 1.2.2002 and 22.3.2004. Subsequent thereto, the period was not extended though the Petitioner continued in service for a period of 5 years.

(3.) MS . S. Mohapatra, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that as the Petitioner had been permitted to continue to hold the post for a period of five years without any interruption, his services ought to have been regularized and the Learned Tribunal committed the error rejecting his claim for regularization. The right of livelihood is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, the petition deserves to be allowed.