MEGH SINGH Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts in brief are that the applicant had passed matriculation examination from H.P. Board of School Education in the year 1980 as per Annexure -A/I. He was engaged as Beldar on September 1,1983 under Rohroo Sub Division with the respondent department till November 1984, in the capacity. Subsequently in the month of December 1984 the applicant was engaged as a Tracer / Draughtsman and a muster roll for this position was issued in favour of the applicant in December 1984. Since Then the applicant has been working as a Tracer / Draughtsman on daily wages against muster roll without break. The applicant has also claimed that he has completed 240 days of regular engagement in each calander year since the year 1985. Despite the fact that the applicant had completed more than 10 years of service continuously as Tracer / Draughtsman from the year 1985 he was not regularised on the ground that the applicant did not possess requisite qualifications. As per Recruitment & Promotion Rules notified on January 18,1961, copy placed as Annexure -RA/II, the qualification prescribed for Tracer are matriculation with Draughtsman course from a recognized Institution. The applicant has not passed the Draughtsman course as required. However, the applicant has passed 10+2. examination in the year 1995 as per Annexure -A/2. The case of the applicant is that having worked as a Tracer / Draughtsman for more than 10 years, he was gained long experience in that capacity and has served the department satisfactorily. That invew of the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court, the applicant is required to be regularised on the post on which he had been working i.e. Tracer/ Draughtsman, on completion of 10 years of service on daily wages. That the respondents are competent to relax the educational qualifications and the same should be relaxed in order to give regular appointment to the applicant. It has also been represented that the respondents as per Annexures -A/3 dated May 9, 1995, A/4 dated nil but the respondents have not taken any action. It has also been alleged that the applicant is being paid at the rate of Rs. 45.75 per day whereas the daily wage for Tracer / Draughtsman are Rs. 73.20 per day.

(2.) The present original application has been filed with the following prayer: - (i) That the respondents be directed to regularise the services of the applicant as Tracer/ Junior Draughtsman w.e.f. January 1, 1994 alongwith all consequential benefits; (ii) That the respondents may be directed to calculate and pay to the applicant the difference of wages payable to him at the rates fixed for Tracer / Draughtsman; (iii) The respondents be directed to relax the requirement of qualification in view of long experience of the applicant or the respondents be directed to regularise the applicant as Road Inspector or Clerk or against any Class -III post by counting his entire service towards that category in daily wage capacity.

(3.) The respondents have opposed the original application and have filed a reply affidavit. It has been admitted in the reply affidavit that the applicant was issued muster roll of Tracer / Draughtsman w.e.f. December 1984. However, it has been stated that he "continued to give assistance to the Tracer Draughtsman till day." The stand taken by the respondents is that a muster roll of Tracer / Draughtsman had been issued to the applicant but he was not working as such. Instead the applicant was only assisting the Tracer Draughtsman. The second stand taken by the respondents is that the necessary qualification for the post of Tracer is matriculate and passing of Draughtsman course from recognised Institution or as a plan printing Machine Operator with four years experience. The applicant does not fulfil these qualifications. Further, recruitment to all Class -III posts is made through H.P Public Service Commission and Tracer / Draughtsman is a post which falls in Class -Ill category. Referring to the guidelines approved by the Honble Apex Court for regularisation of daily waged workers, the respondents have filed Annexure -R/IA which inter alia, states that daily waged workers whether skilled or unskilled, who have completed 10 years or more of continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in a calander year on December 31,1993 shall be appointed as Work -charged employee w.e.f. January 1,1994 and shall be put in the time scale as pay applicable to the corresponding lowest grade in the Government. Further such workers shall be regularised in a phased manner on the basis of seniority -cum -suitability including physical fitness. It has been pleaded that the applicant does not fulfil the qualifications prescribed for the post and as such he is not suitable and is not entitled to the benefit of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court given in Mool Raj Upadhayas case. On these grounds it has been pleaded that the original application may be rejected.