Bant Singh And Another vs Secretary Punjab Mandi Board And … on 9 July, 2008

CWP No.8504 of 1989                                (1)

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                CWP No.8504 of 1989
                                Date of Decision: 9.7.2008


Bant Singh and another                ......Petitioners

            Versus

Secretary Punjab Mandi Board and others

                                      .....Respondents


Coram:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA


Present:    None for the parties.


1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
   judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?


HEMANT GUPTA, J.

The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of

this Court for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the

respondents to frame a rational policy keeping in view the

periodic pronouncements and law laid down by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court.

It is the case of the petitioner that in pursuance of the

advertisement for the post of pump operator and sewerage man

issued by Market Committee Khamano, the petitioners were

appointed on adhoc basis in December, 1986. Though the

petitioners were appointed on adhoc basis, but still respondent

No. 4 i.e. the Secretary, Market Committee, Khamano warned

the petitioner to accept the salary on daily wage basis and in case

they do not accept such salary, their services will be terminated.

The petitioners claim that since they are working on

adhoc basis, the respondents are bound to regularise their
CWP No.8504 of 1989 (2)

services. Reliance was placed upon the judgment in Piara Singh

v. State of Haryana, 1989(1) PLR 396.

The judgment in Piara Singh case (supra) was set

aside by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and

others, etc. etc. v. Piara Singh and others etc. etc., AIR 1992

Supreme Court 2130. Still later in Secretary State of Karnataka

and others v. Uma Devi and others, 2006(4) SCC page 1, the

Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the public posts are

required to be filled up by the public advertisements and

providing an opportunity to all eligible candidates to apply and

compete for the post(s).

As per the allegations of the petitioners themselves,

they were appointed on adhoc basis. The process of selection

on regular basis is required to be undertaken by the Market

Committee, which process alone would be legal and

constitutional.

In view of the above, the claim of the petitioners for

regularisation of their services is wholly unjustified and therefore,

the same is not sustainable.

Consequently, I not find any merit in the writ petition.

Hence, the same is dismissed.

(HEMANT GUPTA)
JUDGE
09-07-2008
ds