RAMESH CHANDER THAKUR Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who has been working as Supervisor in the Municipal Corporation, Shimla, filed Original Application in the year 2002, before the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, which has now been abolished, seeking issuance of directions to the respondents to regularize him as Supervisor, on completion of requisite numbers of years of service, by treating him into service since 1986. On abolition of the said Tribunal in the year 2008, the matter has come to this Court. Facts, as emerge from the record, are as follows. Petitioner was engaged as mazdoor (in record), in the year 1986 by the Municipal Corporation, but actually work of Supervisor (Stacking) was taken from him. In February, 1989, he was retrenched. Petitioner challenged the retrenchment order, by taking recourse to remedy available under the Industrial Disputes Act. An award was passed by the Industrial Tribunal. That award was challenged in this Court, by filing a writ petition, under Articles 226/ 227 of the Constitution of India. That petition was disposed of vide order, dated 7.12.1994. Relevant order is quoted in the reply of the respondents and reads as follows:

(2.) As is made out from the above reproduced order of this Court, petitioner was re-employed in the year 1993. It has been admitted by both the parties that he was re-employed on 16.4.1993. Since the petitioner was re-employed on and with effect from 16.4.1993, his claim that he should be treated to be in service from 1986, cannot be accepted.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner, during the course of hearing, submits that the petitioner should be treated as Supervisor, from the date of his re-employment, i.e. 16.4.1993 and on completion of requisite numbers of years, his services as Supervisor should be regularized. Case of the respondents is that the petitioner had been engaged as mazdoor in the year 1986 and his re-employment in the year 1993 was also as mazdoor, but he, in connivance with some functionaries of the Municipal Corporation, procured bogus documents, indicating that he had been discharging the duties of a supervisor and on the strength of those bogus documents, he is making a false claim for regularization as Supervisor. According to the respondents, petitioner was mazdoor and his services as mazdoor had been regularized and that now his services as Supervisor have also been regularized, since 2010.