RAVINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis in Sub -Division No. -II, HP PWD, Metropole, Shimla in the month of November, 2000. He worked for 44 days in 2000 and 120 days in 2001. Two posts of Helper were created on daily wage basis, as is evident from Annexure R -VII, dated 30.06.2000. The incumbents to be appointed against these two posts were to be taken from those already on rolls of PWD on the rates approved by the Finance Department from time to time in the General Administrative Department's Workshop, H.P. Secretariat, Shimla. Thereafter, the Commissioner -Cum -secretary (GAD), Government of Himachal Pradesh wrote a letter to the Engineer -in -Chief, H.P.P.W.D., Shimla on 05.07.2000, requesting him to depute two daily waged Helpers in the department from those already on rolls of P.W.D. on the rates approved by the Finance Department from time to time vide Annexure R -I. In sequel to these two communications, petitioner alongwith one Smt. Subhadra Kumari was relieved and directed to report in Secretariat (GAD)on 6th August, 2001, vide Annexure P -2. Petitioner and Smt. Subhdra Kumari joined their duties on 6th August, 2001 (F.N.), as per office order dated 13th September, 2001. The State has decided to continue the temporary posts of Helpers as per Annexure P -6, dated 08.04.2010. The Secretary (GAD) wrote a letter to the Engineer -in -Chief, HP PWD, shimla on 20th November, 2010, informing him to repatriate the petitioner to P.W.D. with immediate effect with further observation that the salary may be drawn & disbursed against vacant posts available in Public Works Department. The Secretary, G.A.D. has also recommended to regularize the services of the petitioner as per the policy of the State Government. The Secretary (GAD) also wrote a letter to the Superintending Engineer vide Annexure P -5 on 22.07.2011 stating therein that the petitioner had completed more than 8 years of daily wage service in the G.A.D. as Helper and requires to be regularized as per Government policy. Petitioner was to be repatriated to Public Works Department with immediate effect for regularization. There was a further endorsement in the letter that after regularizing the services of the petitioner, he be sent back to the Department on secondment basis as his services were required in the Mini Workshop of General Administration Department.

(2.) It is clear that petitioner had worked only for 44 days in 2000 and for 120 days only in Public Works Department. He has joined his duties as Helper on 6th August, 2001 in the General Administration Department. The State Government has also decided to continue the temporary posts as per letter dated 8th April, 2010. The State Government has taken a decision on 20th July, 2011 to regularize the service of all those incumbents, who have completed 10 years of continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in a calendar year as on 31.03.2011. Petitioner has also completed 8 years of continuous service with a minimum of 240 days in a calendar year in G.A.D.. The petitioner ought not to have been repatriated to Public Works Department where he had only worked for 164 days. He has gained sufficient experience while working as Helper in the Mini workshop of General Administrative Department. The services of the petitioner are required to be regularized in the General Administrative Department as per Annexure P -4, dated 20th July, 2011. It has also come on record that the persons junior to the petitioner have already been regularized in the Public Works Department. The fact that the posts are available in the G.A.D. is evident from the fact that the Public Works Department has been directed to regularize the services of petitioner and thereafter to send him in G.A.D. on secondment basis. This will amount to unfair labour practice. A person who had already worked for more than 10 years with a minimum of 240 days in a calendar year, could not be ordered to be repatriated arbitrarily, that too, without hearing him. The exercise undertaken by respondent No. 1 to repatriate the petitioner as per Annexure R -4, dated 20th November, 2010 and Annexure P -5, dated 22.07.2011 is arbitrary and, thus, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has also suffered civil consequences, since the persons junior to him in Public Works Department have been regularized, including Smt. Subhadra Kumari and one Shri Krishan Dutt, S/o Shri Sant Ram in 4th Circle, HP PWD, Shimla.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure P -5, dated 22.07.2011 is quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to regularize the services of the petitioner within a period of ten weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. He will be entitled to seniority and back wages from the due date. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs.