IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
C.M. No. 130-C of 2009
In RSA No. 37 of 2009
Date of decision: 22.1.2009
Municipal Council, Jind ... Appellant.
Versus.
Bhagirath and others ... Respondents.
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR
Present: Mr. S.S. Chauhan, Advocate,
for the appellant.
...
ARVIND KUMAR, J:
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the
delay of 118 days in refiling the appeal is condoned.
RSA No. 37 of 2009:
The present appellant was the defendant in the suit for
declaration preferred by plaintiff, Bhagirath.
Plaintiff in his suit pleaded that he was appointed as
Pump Operator on daily-wage basis in June, 1980. He having worked as
such till 14.6.1987, was entitled to be regularized on the said post of
Pump Operator but defendant No.2 regularized him on the post of
Beldar. Thus, plaintiff claimed regularization against the post of Pump
Operator and further sought direction to the defendants to calculate and
pay him arrears of the post of Pump Operator along with interest. Upon
notice of the suit, defendants 1, 2 and 4 did not put in appearance despite
service and were accordingly proceeded against ex-parte. Defendant
No.3 (appellant herein) contested the suit and filed written statement,
stating that the plaintiff does not fulfill the requisite qualification of
Pump Operator which is Matriculation with Pump Operating licence
or Matriculation with diploma from I.T.I..
RSA No. 37 of 2009 -2-
Both the Courts below on appreciation of evidence adduced
by the parties, have decreed the suit of the plaintiff holding that the
plaintiff-respondent had worked on the post of Pump Operator for
sufficiently long period, i.e. for about 11 years and therefore, non-
possessing of requisite qualification, as claimed by the defendants, is no
bar to regularize the plaintiff on the post of Pump Operator, particularly
when in similar circumstances, defendant No.2 vide orders, Exhibits P-
14 and P-15 regularised two other employees, namely, Banarsi Dass and
Ishwar, out of whom Banarsi Dass was simply matriculate while Ishwar
had no educational qualification or licence in regard to Pump Operator.
For coming to this conclusion, the Courts below placed reliance upon a
judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhagwati Prasad v. Delhi
State Mineral Development Corporation, 1990(1) RSJ-255, wherein it
has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the initial minimum
educational qualification prescribed for different posts is undoubtedly a
factor to be reckoned with, which is so at the time of initial entry into
service but once the appointments were made as daily workers and they
were allowed to work for a considerable length of time, it would be hard
and to deny them the confirmation in the respective posts on the ground
that they lack the prescribed educational qualifications. Nothing has
been shown that the findings of fact so recorded by the Courts below
suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to the record. No question of
law, muchless substantial, arises in the present appeal.
Consequently, the appeal being without any merit is hereby
dismissed.
January 22, 2009 ( ARVIND KUMAR) JS JUDGE