EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PHED DIVISION, BHILWARA Vs. RAMESHWAR LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The only issue which arises in this appeal is whether the orders passed by the Tribunal as also by the learned Single Judge holding the respondent entitled to classification as a semi permanent employee are in accordance with the law or not.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State would submit that the Rules known as 'the Work Charged Employees Service Rules, 1964' (for short, the 'Rules of 1964') governing the scheme to confer semi permanent status on a workman was promulgated in the year 1964 and same was subsequently repealed w.e.f. 17/2/1995. The respondent workman was engaged subsequent to that date, and therefore, it is not a case where during his employment the service conditions were altered to his detriment. The legal position could not be brought to the notice of the Courts below which led to granting semi-permanent status to the respondent. He would submit that it is not a disputed fact but admitted position in law that the Rules under which the respondent has been declared entitled to semi permanent status itself was not in existence in the eyes of law on the day when the orders were passed or even on the day workman was employed. Therefore, the order passed by the learned Single Judge is liable to be interfered with.