MADAN LAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant appointed as a Peon (Class -IV) in the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Excise and Taxation, Shimla, respondent No. 3 is claiming pay and allowances admissible to a clerk the duties whereof the applicant, a Class -IV employee has been performing. He is also claiming regularization of his service as a Clerk by way of filing this Original Application as under: - "(a) pay the applicant the full pay and allowances with retrospective effect from 2, 1st November, 1987 in the pay scale as sanctioned for any other clerk in the Department with benefit of annual increments; and (b) consider him regularly appointed Clerk right from the aforementioned date in November, 1987 with all consequential benefits in the matter of seniority, confirmation etc. etc."

(2.) Response of the respondent is that Original Application is not maintainable as the applicant cannot be termed as a person aggrieved under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 which provides that subject to other provisions of this Act, a person aggrieved by any order pertaining to any matter within the jurisdiction of a Tribunal may make an application to the Tribunal for the redressal of his grievance. The applicant has not produced any order passed by the respondents depriving him of his legal right. Therefore, in the absence of such order, the Original Application is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) On merits, the right of the applicant claiming regularization of his service as well as pay admissible to a Clerk is strongly opposed. In fact, it is averred that he has never discharged the duties of a Clerk. The duties of Class. -IV Daftri is distinct from the duties of a Clerk. Therefore, the Original Application is liable to be dismissed on this short ground as well.