CWP NO.1824 OF 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
DATE OF DECISION: 05.2.2009
Balwinder Singh ...Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab & Others ...Respondents
CORAM
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI
PRESENT: Ms.Jyoti Sareen, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab
Permod Kohli, J. (Oral)
Notice of motion.
On the asking of this Court, Mr.B.S.Chahal, DAG, Punjab accepts
notice on behalf of the respondents-State. With the consent of the counsel,
this petition is disposed of at motion stage.
The petitioner was engaged as Driver on daily wage basis on
1.6.1993. He is continuing on the post since then. The petitioner claims
regularization of his services. His case was also recommended vide
Annexure P-5. He also served legal notice dated 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-
6). The grievance of the petitioner is that he is working against a sanctioned
post, but his services have not been regularized till date. The State
Government even notified policy dated 15.12.2006 (Annexure P-3) for
CWP NO.1824 OF 2009 2
regularization of services of similarly situated persons. Even then, no
consideration has been accorded to the case of the petitioner.
The issue of regularization is finally set at rest by Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Secretary State of Karnataka and others Vs. Uma Devi
Secretary State of Karnataka and others Vs. Uma Devi (2006) 4 SCC 1
wherein following observations have been made:-
“53. One aspect needs to be clarified. There may
be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal
appointments) as explained in S.V. Narayanappa,
R.N. Nanjundappa and B.N. Nagarajan and
referred to in para 15 above, of duly qualified
persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have
been made and the employees have continued to
work for ten years or more but without the
intervention of orders of the courts or of tribunals.
The question of regularisation of the services of
such employees may have to be considered on
merits in the light of the principles settled by this
Court in the cases above referred to and in the light
of this judgment. In that context, the Union of
India, the State Governments and their
instrumentalities should take steps to regularise as
a one time measure, the services of such irregularly
appointed, who have worked for ten years or more
in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of
orders of the courts or of tribunals and should
CWP NO.1824 OF 2009 3further ensure that regular recruitments are
undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts
that require to be filed up, in cases where
temporary employees or daily wagers are being
now employed. The process must be set in motion
within six months from this date. We also clarify
that regularisation, if any, already made, but not
sub judice, need not be reopened based on this
judgment, but there should be no further by-
passing of the constitutional requirement and
regularising or making permanent, those not duly
appointed as per the constitutional scheme.”
Under the given circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a
direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in the light
of the government policy which also appears to have been based on the
aforesaid judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court and consequential order be
passed within a period of four months of the receipt of a certified copy of
this order. Needless to say, if the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, it
shall be by a reasoned and speaking order.
(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE
05.2.2009
MFK