Ayurvedic And Unani Tibbia ... vs Durgawati Jaiswal
2003 Latest Caselaw 751 Del

JUDGMENT

Mukul Mudgal, J.

1. The plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner in this writ petition challenging the award dated 5th July, 2002, is whether the respondent Durgawati Jaiswal, who has been working on a daily wages basis as an Aya in the petitioner college since 21st November 1988, could be regularized or not. The learned counsel has submitted that the age limit could be relaxed so as to permit regularization as the respondent at the time of the recruitment was over age. It is the petitioner's own case that its own Screening Committee on 1st February, 2001 recommended the age relaxation and no action was taken by the management for more than one year and no order for regularization could, therefore, be passed as the recommendation of the Screening Committee could not be implemented without the management's approval.

2. In these circumstances, the Tribunal, in my view, rightly granted regularization. It may not be out of place to mention that the respondent had completed her graduation in 1972 and had been compelled to work as an Aya even though she is a Graduate due to her compelling circumstances. The learned counsel for petitioner had not been able to inform the Labour Court whether any action was taken on the recommendation of the Screening Committee even after the passage of one year. More than two years have passed today since the Screening Committee directed age relaxation and no action has been taken on the said recommendation of the petitioner's own Screening Committee up to date.

3. In this view of the matter, the conclusion in the impugned Award of the Tribunal dated 5th July, 2002 directing regularization is perfectly valid. Furthermore, the impugned Award is dated 5th July, 2002 and the writ petition was filed in this Court only on 27th May, 2003 and taken up only more than a year later on 24th July, 2003. The writ petition thus suffers from laches and there is no explanation whatsoever for the said laches. The writ petition, therefore, irrespective of merits warrants dismissal on laches too. Accordingly, there is no merit in the writ petition and it is thus dismissed in liming.