Dharambir & Ors. vs Union Of India & Ors.
2013 Latest Caselaw 749 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                             W.P.(C) No.6728/2010

%                                                         February 14, 2013


      DHARAMBIR & ORS.                                ..... Petitioners
                  Through:               None.


                     versus


      UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                         ..... Respondents

                    Through:             Mr. Jatan Singh, Adv.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA

To be referred to the Reporter or not?


VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)

1. By this writ petition, the petitioners pray for setting aside of

impugned notices dated 1.9.2010 and 6.9.2010 terminating their services,

and for further direction for retaining the three petitioners in service against

their posts of drivers till their age of attaining superannuation.

2. Counsel for the respondents has drawn my attention to the letter

dated 8.1.2007 for creation of posts of members in the office of the National

Disaster Management Authority, and as per which letter a driver appointed

for the Member is to have his service which is co-terminus with the tenure of

the concerned Member.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has also drawn my

attention to the appointment letters of the petitioners dated 8.5.2006, and all

of which specifically state that the appointments of the petitioners are only

temporary and the service can be terminated at any time by either side

without assigning any reason by giving of one month's notice.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents also drawn my attention to

Swamy's - Establishment and Administration Rules, and Rule 7 whereof

provides that the personal staff of the officers appointed under this Rule will

have a tenure which will be co-terminus with the appointment of the

officers. Reference is made to the counter affidavit to show that the

Members of the National Disaster Management Authority have been given

the same status which flows from Rule 7.

5. In view of the above facts which shows that the appointments

of petitioners as drivers had to be co-terminus with the persons who are

appointed as Vice Chairpersons/Members of National Disaster Management

Authority, and since terms/tenures of these Vice Chairpersons/Members

have come to an end, the petitioners also cannot claim regularization of their

services inasmuch as these letters of appointments themselves had made

it clear that petitioners were only temporary employees. Also, the creation

of the post order specifically shows the post of a driver to be co-terminus

with the appointment of Vice Chairpersons/Members of the National

Disaster Management Authority.

6. In view of the above, there is no merit in the writ petition, and

the same is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own

costs.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J FEBRUARY 14, 2013 ak