VINOD KUMAR NANDA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners seek a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and appoint them as Junior Engineers with effect from February 8,1991. A few facts may be noticed.

(2.) The two petitioners claim that they possess the qualification of Diploma in Civil Engineering. Petitioner No. 1 claims to have worked as Beldar/Peon/T-Mate at different intervals of time, while petitioner No. 2 claims to have worked as Work- Mistry, etc. At the time of the filing of the petition, neither of the two petitioners was employed in any establishment.

(3.) On February 5, 1991, the Chief Engineer (Canal) Irrigation Department in- formed the Chief Engineer (Drainage) that the Govt, had decided to appoint 100 junior engineers on purely "temporary basis out of under-employed diploma engineers so that the budget grant could be spent before the close of current financial yearto complete other urgent works well in time." According to this letter, the appointments had to be made "for 89 days or till the post is available whichever would be earlier". Furthermore, the candidates were liable to be reverted to their original posts at any time. It was also provided that "his earlier post would be kept vacant by the Administrator". The petitioners aver that in pursuance to this decision of the department, they had submitted their applications for being considered for appointment as Junior Engineers. While a large number of other persons who were either junior to them or possessed lesser qualification were appointed, their claims were illegally ignored, when their response, the petitioners approached this Court through CWP No. 1092 of 1992. Vide order dated January 23, 1992, the Motion bench directed the respondents "to decide the representations of the petitioners expeditional preferably within six months" and writ petition was accordingly disposed of.