SANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioners are rendering services, in, a, project nomenclatured, as, the Himachal Pradesh Mid Himalayan Watershed Development Project. The terms and conditions of their services are governed by Annexure P-1. Respondent No.3 is the employer, and, is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.

(2.) The writ petitioners were engaged in different capacities under the afore society. Through the apposite Annexures, orders were made for placing the writ petitioners against posts higher, than, whereagainst(s) they stood initially recruited, on, a contractual basis. However, subsequently through the impugned Annexure, comprised in Annexure P-4, the afore order became withdrawn, consequently through the instant writ petition, the writ petitioners seek quashing, of, the impugned Annexure, borne in Annexure P-4.

(3.) Since the employer of the writ petitioners', is, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, (i) thereupon unless it qualifies the constitutional test, of its, being an authority(s) within the ambit of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and, thereafter it also qualifies the indispensable norm of it, being instrumentality or agency of the State, (ii) thereupon alone the relief as canvassed in the instant writ petition, may be grantable, through a judicial review, being made of Annexure P-4. In making test(s), vis-a-vis, the afore constitutional norm, becoming satiated by the employer of the petitioners, the making, of, an allusion, to the apposite expostulations made qua therewith, and, as become cast in a judgment, of, the Hon'ble Apex Court, rendered in a case titled as Ajay Hasia versus K halid Mujib , 1981 AIR(SC) 487, becomes imperative.