DALBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in this group of eight petitions complain that their services have been arbitrarily terminated. They pray that the orders of termination be quashed and that the respondents be directed to allow them to continue in service. They further pray that their services be regularised. Counsel for the parties have referred to the facts in Civil Writ Petition No. 19328 of 1996. These may be briefly noticed.

(2.) The petitioners were appointed as Beldars/Barkandaz by the Superintending Engineer, Uppar Bari Doab Canal Circle, Amritsar. A copy of the order dated August 21, 1996 issued to petitioner No. 2 regarding his appointment has been produced as Annexure P-1 with the writ petition. On October 23, 1996, the Chief Engineer observed that the appointments had been made by the Superintending Engineer in violation of the instructions issued by the State Government. In pursuance of the directions of the Chief Engineer, an office order dated November 22, 1996 was issued by which the petitioners were given 30 days' notice at the expiry of which their services were to be "deemed to be terminated w.e.f. 20.12.1996". A Copy of the order issued to petitioner No. 2 has been produced as Annexure P-2 with the writ petition. It has been averred that similar orders were issued to the other petitioners as well. The petitioners allege that their appointments had been made in conformity with the past practice. Some of the persons who had been similarly appointed by the Superintending Engineer are still continuing in service. In spite of that, their services have been terminated without the issue of any show cause notice or the grant of any opportunity whatsoever. The action is, thus, violative of the principles of natural justice and the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution.

(3.) The respondents contest the petitioners' claim. It has been pointed out that the appointments were made by the Superintending Engineer without issuing any advertisement or sending any requisition to the Employment Exchange. The case was not referred to any "competent selecting agency". No interview was held. Thus, the appointments were wholly illegal and violative of "the doctrine of equality". Consequently, these were ordered to be terminated after serving a 30 days' notice in accordance with the directions given by the Chief Engineer.