ABDUL RAHIM MIR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of State of Jammu and Kashmir, challenges the judgment and order dated 19.07.2007 rendered by Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal ( for brevity 'the Tribunal'), holding that the petitioners could not avail any benefit from the scheme known as Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status & Regularisation) Scheme of India, 1993 because Clause 4 of the scheme required the petitioners in employment as casual labourers on the date of commencement of the scheme and that they should have rendered continuous service of at least one year i.e. 240 days in an year.

(2.) THE Tribunal has recorded categoric finding that the writ petitioners were disengaged with effect from 10.10.1992 for a period of more than two years. For grant of temporary status or for regularisation they were required to be in the employment of the department on the date of issuance of Office Memorandum incorporating the 1993 Scheme. They were thus found to be out of job on 01.09.1993 when the scheme of 1993 came into force. In that regard reliance has been placed on the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India and anr v. Mohan Pal and ors, (2002) 4 SCC 573. According to the view expressed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Mohan Pal's case (supra), the scheme of 1993 was not an ongoing scheme and the temporary status could be conferred on casual labourers under that scheme only by virtue of clause 4 of the scheme. The said condition of the scheme stipulated that the casual labourer should have been in employment as on the date of commencement of the scheme. The view of the Tribunal is discernible from the following operative part of the order, which reads thus:-

(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and are of the view that this petition is devoid of merit and thus required to be dismissed.