Bombay High Court
Parag S/O Dadaji Chandekar And ... vs The Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur ... on 29 June, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
WP 6025/15 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 6025/2015
1. Parag s/o Dadaji Chandekar,
Aged: Major, Occ: Service.
2. Maroti s/o Raghunath Bawane,
Aged: Major, Occ: Service.
3. Suresh s/o Vitthal Pendor,
Aged: Major, Occ: Service.
4. Vishwajeet s/o Ganpat Chandekar,
Aged: Major, Occ: Service.
5. Sunil s/o Ganpat Potnake,
Aged: Major, Occ: Service.
All r/o Chandrapur, Tahsil &
District : Chandrapur. PETITIONERS
.....VERSUS.....
1. The Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur,
through its Chief Executive Officer.
2. The Divisional Commissioner,
Nagpur Division, Nagpur.
3. The Director of Health Services,
Directorate of Health Services, Mumbai.
4. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Department of Public Health,
10th Floor, Complex Building
Premises of G.T. Hospital, Mumbai.
5. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Department of Rural Development
& Water Conservation,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032. RESPONDENTS
Shri A.S. Kilor, counsel for the petitioners.
Shri J.B. Kasat, counsel for the respondent no.1.
Shri H.R. Dhumale, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.2 to 5.
CORAM :SMT.VASANTI A NAIK AND
A.D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATE : 29 TH JUNE, 2017.
WP 6025/15 2 Judgment
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT.VASANTI A NAIK, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioners seek a direction against
respondent-Zilla Parishad not to terminate the services of the petitioners
and to continue them in service till the government takes a decision on
their representation for the regularization of their services.
In view of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Umadevi reported in 2007(6) Mh.L.J. 667 as also
the other judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in
2011 AIR SCW 1332 (State of Orissa & Another Versus Mamata
Mohanty), 2014(2) Scale 262 (Renu & Others Versus District &
Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari & Another) and (2014) 7 SCC 223 (State of
Jharkhand & Others Versus Kamal Prasad & Others), it would not be
proper for this Court to direct the State Government to issue a
direction to the Zilla Parishad to regularize the services of the
petitioners. The petitioners are working on the posts of Driver in the
Health Department of the Zilla Parishad, on contract basis. The
benefit of regularization cannot be granted to the petitioners as they
have not rendered ten years of continuous service on or before the
cut-off date as prescribed by the judgment in the case of Umadevi
reported in 2007(6) Mh.L.J. 667. The petitioners are appointed
sometime in the year 2004-05 and, hence, they could not have
completed ten years of continuous service for seeking regularization
WP 6025/15 3 Judgment
as per the judgment reported in (2014) 7 SCC 223 (State of Jharkhand &
Others Versus Kamal Prasad & Others).
Though the services of the petitioners cannot be regularized
as their appointment is not made in clear vacancies by following the due
procedure of selection and they are appointed on contract basis, the
services of the petitioners cannot be terminated by appointment of
contractual employees. In our view, the Zilla Parishad cannot terminate
the services of the petitioners and appoint Drivers on contract basis by
replacing the petitioners. The services of the petitioners could be
terminated only when the Zilla Parishad appoints Drivers on permanent
posts in clear vacancies by following the due procedure for selection or
only if their services are not required at all, in future.
With the above observations, we dispose of the writ petition
with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
