KUNJ BIHARI SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are claiming regularization. They earlier filed writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 7242 of 2006 which was disposed of on 18.12.2006. On the submission of learned Counsel, appearing for the respondents, the competent authority was directed to consider the petitioners representation. Pursuant to the said order the competent authority of the Ministry of Coal considered petitioners representation and rejected it on 12.4.2007 by passing the following order: Legally, the Part -Time Tribunal at Ranchi, has been set up under the provision of the CBA (A&D) Act, 1957, with the objective to settle disputes regarding payment of compensation against land acquisition under the said Act. The establishment of the Tribunal is for a limited period and its tenure is extended from time to time subject to the number of pending cases for disposal. Further, the working of the Tribunal is part -time in nature and is not permanent. You have been appointed on purely temporary basis by the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal and the Ministry of Coal has no role whatever, in this regard. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it has been decided by the competent authority that your request for regularization of services has no legal base. This disposes off your representation dated 15.1.2007 in compliance with the Order dated 18.12.2006 issued by the Honble High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi. You are however at liberty to apply to Coal India Limited for consideration of your request on compassionate grounds subject to clearance of the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal.

(2.) THE letter dated 18.7.2007 was relied by the petitioner to show that the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal forwarded the petitioners request to the Chairman, Coal India Limited to consider the case sympathetically, observing that the law of the land established by the Supreme Court is that the service of a workman who had put in 240 days continuous service should be regularized.

(3.) IN the circumstance, no relief can be granted. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, no costs.