GULZAR SINGH PANNU Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of CWP Nos. 11851, 11876 of 2006 and 5782 of 2008 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these petitions. For the sake of brevity, facts are being taken from CWP No. 11851 of 2006.

(2.) THE Petitioners were appointed as Agriculture Inspectors re -designated as Agriculture Development Officers in the year 1978 -79 on the dates mentioned in Annexure P -2, whereas the private Respondents were appointed on the dates indicated in paragraph 19 of the writ petition. Some of the Petitioners were ordered to be regularized with effect from 1st January, 1985, - -vide order dated 5th May, 1986 whereas the private Respondents were regularized on different dates in the years 1981 -1985 as indicated in paragraph 19 of the writ petition. Vide the impugned orders (Annexure P -15) the private Respondents have been given the benefit of regularization retrospectively with effect from the date of their initial appointment, - -vide orders Annexures P -7, P -9 and P -l 0. The Petitioners also represented to the Respondents for grant of benefits with effect from the date of their initial engagement. The Respondents did not consider the request of the Petitioners. The Petitioners filed CWP No. 16962 of 2004 in this Court. Vide order dated 15th December, 2004, the said petition was disposed of by this Court with a direction to take decision on the legal notice of the Petitioner. The Respondents have consequently passed the impugned order dated 16th January, 2006 whereby the benefit of regularization with effect from the date of their initial appointment on ad hoc basis has been declined in terms of Rule 8 of the Punjab Civil Services (General Common Conditions) Service Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as " 1994 Rules,).

(3.) PRIVATE Respondents were duly served and despite service, they did not appear and were proceeded ex parte, - -vide order dated 8th May, 2007.