TIRLOCHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the petitioners came into service of the State of Punjab in the end of September, 1983. They filed the present writ petition claiming regularisation. It is stated that the petitioners had been appointed after interview. The vacancies had been sponsored by the Employment Exchange. The interviews were held by the Departmental Selection Committee constituted for the purpose for the districts of Kapurthala and Jalandhar. They were appointed in a running scale of Rs. 400 - 600 with usual allowances. It was, however, mentioned in the appointment orders that the appointment is for a period of six months on ad hoc basis or till such time candidate selected by the Selection Board are made available (whichever is earlier). On expiry of six months period, die services of the petitioners shall automatically be terminated. It was also provided that the services could be terminated without assigning any reason and show -cause notice and their resignations can also be got accepted without any prior notice. The seniority in the cadre will be determined as per the rules in force, from time to time. The appointment orders also stated that the petitioners would be governed by the Government Employees Conduct Rules, 1966 as incorporated in Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume 1, Part II and Chapter 23. The petitioners were also required to give an undertaking that they will not undertake any job of private work as described in Chapter 23 of the Rules. All the petitioners fulfil the qualifications prescribed for the Posts of Vaccinators in Class III. The petitioners were imparted necessary training and they had been performing the duties of Vaccinators. By orders dated 20.11.1984 and 23.11.1984 the petitioners were relieved from the posts of Vaccinators. The petitioners were relieved, inspite of. the fact that no regular incumbents were appointed on the post of Vaccinators, by She Subordinate Services Selection Board. The petitioners remained out of service for about two months, when they were re -employed, pursuant to the order dated 21.1.1985 (Annexure P -4). The petitioners re -joined on 24.1.1985 and 25,1.1985. This time, the petitioners were appointed for 89 days. After the expiry of 89 days, the petitioners continued to work as Vaccinate though no orders were issued by the respondents. The petitioners were further informed that they should continue to work as Vaccinators and they would be paid the salary when the same is sanctioned by the higher authorities. Respondent No. 2, the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Punjab, Chandigarh issued a letter on 10.5.1985 (Annexure P -5) directing all the Civil Surgeons in the State of Punjab to utilise the services of the Vaccinators, including the petitioners who were working on ad hoc basis, as superior field workers, during the spray period for prevention of Malaria. The petitioners filed the present writ petition on 27.9.1985 apprehending that their services would be terminated as the Malaria season would come to an end on 30.9.1985. In the meantime, the President of India issued order dated 28.3.1985 (annexure P -6) directing that ad hoc/temporary Class III Employees who had completed a minimum of two years of service as on 1.4.85 and are qualified to hold the posts against which they were employed, be regularised on the post held by them. The Government of Punjab also issued instructions vide letter No. 12/1/82 -1 GE/10933 dated 8.8,1985 (Annexure P -7) by which the condition of two years service as provided in the order (Annexure P -6) was reduced to one year. All the petitioners, therefore, fulfilled all the conditions mentioned in the order (Annexure P -6) and instructions (Annexure P -7). It was submitted that none regularisation of the services of the petitioners is violative of orders (Annexure P -6) and instructions (Annexure P -7).

(2.) THE writ petition came up for motion hearing on 27.9.1985. Notice of motion was issued for 26.10.1985. Termination of the services of the petitioners was stayed till further orders. The petitioners continued to be in service, on the basis of the interim orders issued by this Court.

(3.) MR . Chawla submits that the claim of the petitioners is squarely covered under the order (Annexure P -6) and the instructions (Annexure P -7). The petitioners could not have been denied regularisation on the ground that they had not completed two years/one year service on 1.4.1985. The petitioners had been in continuous service since September, 1983. They had been duly selected through the Employment Exchange. They were qualified to hold the posts. Their services were illegally terminated on 20.11.1984.They were re -employed on 21.1.1985 and had continued as such.