Sanjay Singh Kushwah vs Resident Commissioner, M.P. … on 8 July, 2008

*                  HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                            LPA No.229/2007

       Sanjay Singh Kushwah                    ..... Appellant
                      Through Mr.Rajendra Prasad, Advocate

                   versus

       Resident Commissioner, M.P. Bhawan,
       Government of M.P. & Ors.               ..... Respondent
                     Through Mr.C.D. Singh, Advocate

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
       HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR

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

                                    ORDER

% 08-07-2008

1. The appellant, who is a Diploma holder in Electrical

Engineering, was appointed to the post of Sub Engineer

(Electrical/Mechanical) on contract basis on 1st July, 1997. The

appellant had applied for the said post pursuant to an

advertisement in the Employment News inviting applications for

recruitment to the said post on contract basis. It was specifically

mentioned in the said advertisement that the appointment is on

contract basis for two years but will be extendable upto 60 years

LPA No.229/2007 page 1 of 3
of age. The appellant’s contract was extended from time to time

and last such extension being with effect from 2nd January, 2006

to 30th June, 2006. On 1st June, 2006, the respondent No.2 issued

an advertisement inviting tenders from reputed manpower

providing agencies for recruitment, amongst others, to the post of

Sub Engineer (Mech./Civil), by outsourcing the same on contract

basis. The appellant assailed the said advertisement on the basis

that the appellant having worked in the post of the Sub-Engineer

(Elec./Mech.) for nine years, he is entitled to continue in service

and his services ought to be regularised w.e.f. 5th July, 1997.

2. The learned single Judge has held that the appellant was

appointed only as a contractual employee and not against any

permanent or sanctioned post. The appointment letter clearly

stated that his employment is contractual, for a period of two

years and that during the period of the contract, a consolidated

pay of Rs.5,000/- shall be payable. There is no violation of

Articles 14 or 16 of the Constitution in not regularising the

services of the appellant and consequently the appellant is not

entitled to any relief.

3. In our opinion, in view of the decisions of the Supreme

Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Umadevi

LPA No.229/2007 page 2 of 3
(3) and Ors. [(2006) 4 SCC 1], Mineral Exploration

Corporation Limited and Anr. [(2006) 6 SCC 310], Municipal

Corporation, Jabalpur v. Om Prakash Dubey [2006 (13) Scale

266 and Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v.

Workman, Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. [(2007)

1 SCC 408], the prayer of the appellant for regularisation cannot

be accepted. The learned single Judge has rightly declined to

grant any relief to the appellant. The appeal has no merit. The

same is dismissed.

                                         CHIEF JUSTICE



                                         S.MURALIDHAR
JULY 08, 2008                               (JUDGE)
"nm"




LPA No.229/2007                                            page 3 of 3