BHOLA RAM Vs. RSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner - workman Bhola Ram S/o Multana Ram was working as daily rated workman as Conductor in the respondent -RSRTC and was removed from the services on 21.4.1980. He filed a civil suit No. 79/82 and under the decree dtd.9.9.1986, he was directed to be reinstated back in service as his termination w.e.f. 21.4.1980 was held to be illegal. The petitioner was thus reinstated back after the respondent - RSRTC lost its appeal before the High Court also vide Annex.2 dtd.25.6.1988 as daily wages Conductor and was posted in Khetdi Depot of respondent - RSRTC. He was also assigned the regular pay scale under the order Annex. 1 dtd.2.11.1998 w.e.f. 1.3.1983. The controversy involved in the present case arose because of passing of order Annex.4 dtd. 18.4.2000 and recalling the previous order Annex. 1 dtd.2.11.1988, the respondent - RSRTC changed the date of regularisation to 2.11.1998. The respondents have sought to rely upon two Circulars in support of said Annex. 4 dtd. 18.4.2000, namely, office order dt.31.3.1995 and office order dt. 13.10.1997 produced with the reply to the writ petition, which has been filed today only.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sanjay Vyas has urged that the impugned order Annex.4 dtd. 18.4.2000 was passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without any valid rhyme or reason and the respondents could not withdraw the benefits given to the petitioner in pursuance of decree of the Civil Court dtd.9.9.1986 in civil suit No. 79/1982 filed by him and the Circulars issued by the respondent - RSRTC are not applicable to the present petitioner and the respondents have not explained any relevance of the date 2.11.1998 in the present case.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. Anil Bachhawat, learned counsel appearing for the respondent - RSRTC urged that the said Circulars permitted regularisation of daily wage workers only w.e.f. 1.10.1994 subject to fulfillment of certain conditions stipulated in the said office orders dtd.31.3.1997 and 13.10.1997. He submitted that since the petitioner was reinstated back in service under Order Annex.2 dtd.25.6.1988 only as daily wages workman/conductor, regularisation of his services would be governed by the Circulars/Orders dtd.31.3.1995 and 13.10.1997, Annex.R/1 and R/2 respectively. He, therefore, submitted that mistake of the date in Ex. 1 giving him the benefit of regular pay scale w.e.f 1.3.1983 was rectified by the impugned order Anex.4 and his regularisation was done in the services w.e.f. 2.11.1998 and therefore, the impugned order Annex.4 dtd. 18.4.2000 deserves to be upheld.