YAMIN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed seeking the direction to respondent No.3, which is the private co-operative society not to replace the petitioners who are working as Ward Servant, Plumber, Security Guard, Sanitation Worker, Sewer Men, Computer Operator etc. with the further direction that they should be allowed to continue in service.

(2.) Before the prayer of the petitioners is considered, the State of Haryana has raised a preliminary objections with regard to the maintainability of the present writ petition. As per the objections raised by the State of Haryana, the State of Haryana is not the employer of the petitioners and therefore, no direction can be issued to the State of Haryana so as to allow the petitioners to continue, in the absence of any master servant relationship.

(3.) During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners very fairly conceded that initially the petitioners were the employees of M/s S.M. Enterprises, Kaithal, who was engaged as a Contractor for outsourcing the services of employees and later on, after the contract of the said M/s S.M. Enterprises was over, respondent No.3-co-operative society was engaged as a service provider for outsourcing the service of the employees. Learned counsel for the petitioners further concedes that the petitioners are the employees of a private contractor, though working with the Health Department of the Govt. of Haryana on the basis of contractual obligations between the respondent No.1 and the private contractor i.e. respondent No.3.