STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. Vs. BHARAT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent had filed suit for declaration challenging the order dated 27.10.2005, whereby, he was ordered to be regularised/absorbed against the post of Labourer instead of Tractor driver and the order dated 21.06.2006, whereby, appeal filed by the respondent, was dismissed.

(2.) The case of the respondent-plaintiff, in brief, was that he was appointed as Tractor driver on 01.03.1994 and his services were terminated w.e.f. 01.10.1996. Respondent raised an industrial dispute and the Labour Court vide its award dated 08.10.1999 ordered the reinstatement of the respondent with continuity of service. In compliance of the said award, respondent was reinstated in service and he joined his duties. Thereafter, respondent made a representation for regularisation of his services as a driver (Group 'C'). However, vide order dated 27.10.2005, respondent was regularised as a Labourer (Group 'D'). Aggrieved against the said order, respondent preferred an appeal, but the said appeal was dismissed by Chief Conservator of Forests vide order dated 21.06.2006. The case of the respondent-plaintiff further, was that he had been performing the duties of a driver and was therefore, liable to be regularised as a driver instead of a Labourer. Hence, the suit was filed by the respondent-plaintiff. Appellants-defendants in their written statement averred that respondent-plaintiff was appointed on temporary basis and was paid wages on D.C. rates. The respondent-plaintiff was liable to be regularised as a Labourer. It was further averred that post of driver was lying vacant in the office and in public interest, respondent had worked as a driver. As soon as some driver was appointed through Service Selection Board or on transfer, then the said person would work as a regular driver.

(3.) On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the trial Court:-