RAMDAYAL KARKETTA Vs. RANCHI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order dated 20.10.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 6007/2004* by which the writ petition filed by the petitioner/appellant herein was dismissed on the ground that it is barred by the principle of constructive res judicata. .

(2.) THE appeal arises out of a petition which has a chequered history as the petitioners/appellants herein initially filed a writ petition claiming regular appointment on Class -IV post on which they were discharging duties on daily wage. The petitioners/appellants herein succeeded in securing regular appointment from the year 2002 and they were ordered to be paid regular salary. Prior to this, the petitioners/appellants herein had all through been contesting for their regularization and finally they were denied the benefit on the ground that they were discharging their duties on the posts which were not sanctioned. However, the entire controversy was finally set at rest and the petitioners/ appellants herein were granted regular appointment alongwith the regular salary Thereafter, they filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge out of which this appeal arises praying therein that they should be granted the benefit of arrears of salary, gratuity and provident fund etc, from the date they were appointed on daily wage and were discharging duties on the posts which were not even sanctioned. The learned Single Judge did not enter into the merit of the matter but was pleased to dismiss the writ petition on the ground of constructive res judicata as all ready indicated hereinbefore.

(3.) THIS plea obviously was not even raised by the appellants at the relevant time. However, after securing an order of regularization they filed writ petition before the learned Single Judge, .which was dismissed but we concur with the view of the learned Single Judge that this point is clearly barred by the principle of constructive res judicata for after securing an order of regularization, the consequential relief of regularization from a back date i.e. with retrospective effect, if at all it was admissible, ought to have been raised by the appellants at the relevant stage when the order of regularization was passed in their favour.