RAMESH KUMAR Vs. NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent is a corporate body, wholly controlled and owned by the Government of India. The petitioners are the citizens of India. They were employed by the respondent as Peon -cum -Messengers, initially on ad hoc -cum -contract basis. Petitioner No.1 was so employed in the year 1989, while petitioner No.2 was appointed in the year 1988. They were paid certain amounts of money by way of consolidated salary. Later on a decision was taken by the Management Board of the respondent to fill up 52 vacancies, including some posts of Peons -cum -Messengers, on regular basis. The two writ petitioners, applied for appointment of regular basis. They were interviewed and were recommended for appointment and appointment letters were accordingly issued to them in April, 1991. The appointment letters are Annexures P -4 and P -4/A. As per these appointment letters, the writ petitioners were appointed, in regular pay scale of Rs.1100 -20 -1400 plus allowances. They were ordered to remain on probation for a period of six months each, which was extendable for a further period of six months. However, the petitioners were to be presumed to be on extended period of probation, until written orders of confirmation were issued. Increments were not to be released pending confirmation.

(2.) In spite of having been appointed in regular pay scale and on regular basis, in accordance with the rules pertaining to recruitment and promotions, formulated by the respondent, vide appointment orders Annexures P -4 and P -4/A, the writ petitioners were not paid pay and allowances based on regular pay scale. Both of them were paid a consolidated salary of Rs.1500/ - each. They filed a writ petition being CWP No. 133 of 1988, on 8.2.1998 in this Court, seeking the issuance of direction to the respondent to pay salary and allowances according to regular pay scales. During the pendency of the writ petition, on being approached by some of the other 52 candidates, selected along -with the writ petitioners and situated similarly as the writ petitioners, High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, Punjab & Haryana High Court and Delhi High Court delivered some judgments. The Punjab & Haryana High Court, Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur gave verdicts in favour of the persons, similarly situated as the writ petitioners, while the High Court of Delhi gave a verdict favourable to the respondent.

(3.) When the earlier writ petition No. 133 of 1998 came up for hearing on 18.9.2003 in this Court, the writ petitioners were allowed to withdraw the same with liberty reserved to them to file a fresh writ petition on the same cause of action, after examining the judgments of the aforesaid High Courts. But to their dismay, the respondent, soon after the withdrawal of the writ petition, terminated their services. The orders of the termination, inter alia stated that reasons for termination, which are as follows - "I) Petitioners appointment was illegal & void due to misusing the official capacity by the concerned NFL officials who violated the recruitment rules by not issuing a notice to the Employment Exchange, by not issuing a press advertisement, no step was taken to reserve any post for ST/SC/Ex -serviceman/Handicapped persons and while there was ban on recruitment. ii) The decision to terminate petitioners service was taken after reviewing the matter in its entirety. iii) Petitioners would be entitled to the payment of gratuity. iv) Petitioners are not entitled for the payment of retrenchment compensation under ID Act, 1947, yet compensation u/s 25 F of the said Act be paid to them as an abundant caution."