MOHD MAQBOOL BHAT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER who joined the Power Development Department (PDD) as class IV way back in the year 1988, though initially for a limited period, has continued as such Class IV employee of PDD to date. A graduate and type Knowing, he has been given the job of a typist which carries grade of Jr. Assistant in the arrangement of one Som Nath Koul, a vacancy caused by his unauthorised absence vide order No. CAO/ 10 of 1990 dated 12 -05 -1990 (annexure -B). Again by way of a temporary adjustment in the Jr. Assistant grade, for last over ten years petitioner has been continuously working and discharging his duties as a typist Jr. Assistant. He represented, but no decision has been taken on his representation. Though a Departmental Promotion Committee was constituted way back in July 1991, where petitioner along with others competed for the post of typist/Jr. Assistant, his performance was assessed by the Committee. He performed better than other two candidates as can be seen from the evaluation sheet of the Committee (annexure -C) but still the matter did not make any headway and no decision regarding petitionerâ„¢s appointment on promotion was taken. Even thereafter petitioner was continuing as such typist vide order dated 28 -10 -1994 (annexure -D). Service book of petitioner has been prepared. Petitionerâ„¢s present representation for regularisation (annexure -G, H, I) have borne no result. Annexure -K also shows that the petitioner is reckoned on the post of typist/Jr. Assistant even at the time of last pay revision 1998.

(2.) IN its objections Mr. R.A. Khan submits that the same way be treated as reply. Petitionerâ„¢s initial appointment as Chowkidar his affiliation as such and his subsequent adjustment on stop gap arrangement as Jr. Assistant/typist is admitted, but is submitted that the appointment of petitioner is subject to approval of Departmental Promotion Committee. The previous Departmental Promotion Committee could not finalise the matter as some of the members retired on superannuation from service. Respondents/competent authority is preparing to consider the petitionerâ„¢s case and it is to be forwarded to the DPC. The petitioner submits that his whole grievance is that despite his officiating as Jr. Assistant/typist, his case has not been considered either by Department or Departmental Promotion Committee and the procedure as prescribed under law has not been followed to redress his grievance and regularise his services, when he was served respondents for long last ten years. The counsel Mr. R. Khan submits that the respondents are constrained to move further in the matter in so far as the case has to be considered within parameters of the rules, which require consideration of case by DPC. Yet the counsel concedes that steps shall have be taken and action initiated for regularisation of petitioner on typist/Jr. Assistant post. To this end other eligible candidates are also to be considered in the process petitionerâ„¢s experience, performance, length of officiation service as Typist/Jr. Assistant in PDD, his conduct etc. etc. shall have to be given fair, reasonable and due consideration. In State of Haryana and ors Vs. Piara Singh and ors (1992) 2 SCC 118, the Apex Court observed: - As regards the temporary/adhoc employees in Govt. service, the normal rule is regular recruitment through the prescribed agency but exigencies of administration may sometimes call for an adhoc or temporary appointment to be made. In such a situation, effort should always be to replace such an adhoc/temporary employee by a regularly selected employee as early as possible.......If for any reason, an adhoc or temporary employee is continued for a fairly long spell, the authorities must consider his case for regularisation provided he is eligible and qualified according to the rules and his service record is satisfactory....persons continuing in service over a number of years have a right to claim regularisation and the authorities are under an obligation to consider their case for regularisation in a fair manner. On consideration, with consent to parties, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondents/competent authority to consider the case of petitioner for regularisation against the post of typist/Jr. Assistant in terms of rules and for the purpose if Departmental Promotion Committee is to be constituted, steps shall be taken towards that end and the DPC shall be convened to consider the matter. This exercise shall be completed within a period of four months, unless for sufficient cause, the period is extended on motion. Petitionerâ„¢s case for retrospective promotion from the date work is being taken from him as typist/Jr. Assistant shall also be considered within parameters of law. After all respondents/competent authority are/is under legal obligation to consider petitionerâ„¢s case in a fair manner justly within a reasonable time period. Disposed of.