ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M. No. 7822 of 2014

(2.) Mr. R.K. Malik, learned Senior Counsel assisting by Mr. Tejpal Dhull Advocate, appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as a daily wager on 1.10.1995 and thereafter his services were illegally terminated on 3.6.1996 and in pursuance to the reference being raised, the Labour Court announced the award in favour of the workman, which, has attained finality upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court and on 2.6.2010, the petitioner was taken back in service. As per the policy dated 1.10.2003 (Annexure P-4), the Government had decided to regularise the services of the daily wagers, who had completed three years of service as on 30.9.2003 and vide Annexure P-5, the case of the petitioner was sent for regularisation on 30.5.2011. However, vide order dated 10.4.2013 (Annexure P-6), the case of the petitioner was returned back with the observation that the policy pertaining to 2003 had been withdrawn. He submits that since the case of the petitioner was covered by the 2003 policy, therefore, the action of the respondents was illegal and accordingly the Executive Engineer on 20.6.2013 (Annexure P-7) again recommended the case of the petitioner for regularisation in the light of the policy, but the services of the petitioner have not been regularised. He has further stated that similarly situated persons had filed a writ petition in this Court, whose services have been regularised, vide judgment dated 11.1.2012 (Annexure P-8). He has further drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure P-11 dated 18.6.2014, whereby the State had decided to regularise the services of the employees who had been left out.

(3.) Mr. Hitesh Pandit, learned Addl. A.G. appearing for the State submits that the services of the petitioner have been regularised w.e.f. 1.7.2014 and there is no nothing wrong in the action of the respondents in not regularising the service w.e.f. 1.10.2003.