Delhi High Court
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Sh. Rishi Pal And Another on 27 October, 2010
Author: Valmiki J. Mehta
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) No. 117/1997
% 27th October, 2010
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI ...... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Biji Rajesh, Advocte.
VERSUS
SH. RISHI PAL AND ANOTHER ....Respondents
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (Oral)
1. The challenge by means of the present petition under
Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is to the Award
dated 6.6.1995 passed by the Industrial Tribunal whereby it was
ordered that the workman Rishi Pal is entitled to be regularized
from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 15.7.1981.
2. The only issue in this case is whether the workman is
entitled to regularization from the date of his initial appointment
WP(C) No. 117/1997 Page 1 of 3
or in due course as per the policy of the petitioner. The workman
was appointed as a Mali/Baildar on daily wages basis.
3. It has now been held by the Supreme Court in a
catena of decisions that regularization of an employee cannot de
hors the rules of an organization and which violate constitutional
principles. These judgments are M.P. State Agro Industries
Development Corpn. and Another Vs. S.C. Pandey 2006 (2)
SCC 716, Gangadhar Pillai Vs. Siemens Ltd. (2007) 1 SCC
533, State of M.P. and Others Vs. Lalit Kumar Verma
(2007) 1 SCC 575, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. Dan
Bahadur Singh and Others (2007) 6 SCC 207, State of
Uttaranchal and Another Vs. Prantiya Sinchai Avam Bandh
Yogana Shramik Mahaparishad (2007) 12 SCC 483,
Chandra Shekhar Azad Krishi Evam Prodyogiki
Vishwavidyalaya Vs. United Trades Congress and Another
2008 (2) SCC 552 and Official Liquidator Vs. Dayanand
2008 (10) SCC 1
4. The counsel for the petitioner has contended that the
workman had already been regularized however in terms of an
extant policy he could not have been regularized from the date of
his initial appointment. It has been argued that as per the office
order dated 16.8.1989 the workman was rightly regularized only
w.e.f.1.4.88 in accordance with the policy of the petitioner. I
WP(C) No. 117/1997 Page 2 of 3
agree with the counsel for the petitioner because a daily wager
can only be regularized in accordance with the policy of the
petitioner. The admitted position is that the original appointment
of the workman was not in a regular manner or through the
employment exchange. Such employment being illegal cannot
ordinarily be regularized. The matter is no longer res integra and
covered by a Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court
in the case of State of Karnataka and Others Vs. Umaevi
(2006) 4 SCC 1 and which has been further reaffirmed in
Dayanand's case (supra). Accordingly, the impugned Award is
set aside whereby the regularization of the workman was
directed to be from the initial date of appointment on 15.7.1981.
The workman will only be regularized in terms of the office order
dated 16.8.1989 w.e.f. 1.4.1988.
5. The petition is therefore disposed of accordingly
leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
OCTOBER 27, 2010 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.
Ne
