Delhi High Court
Director General Of Works & Ors. vs Harvir Singh & Anr on 28 November, 2016
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment Dated: 28th November, 2016
+ W.P.(C) 15168/2006
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF WORKS & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through Ms. Abha Malhotra, Advocate for the
petitioner along with Mr. Deepak
Ahuja, Office Superintendent.
versus
HARVIR SINGH & ANR ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Deepak Khadaria, Advocate for
respondent no.1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL)
1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 01.12.2005 passed by
the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to for short as
„the Tribunal‟), by which the OA filed by the respondent has been
allowed.
2. The pleadings are complete in this matter. Rule DB was issued on
08.07.2008.
3. The necessary facts, which are required to be noticed for disposal of this
writ petition, are that respondent joined the CPWD as a casual worker on
muster roll basis on the post of Assistant Pump Operator on 08.11.1983.
After almost 10 years, on 01.09.1993 he was granted a temporary status.
Meanwhile, on 31.01.1988, an Arbitration Award was rendered deciding
disputes between the Management of the CPWD and its employees
regarding re-classification/re-categorization of various categories of
employees. Also, by an order dated 06.05.1991, the Supreme Court of
India in Writ Petition No.1324/1990 titled 'CPWD Karamchari Union v.
Union of India' directed re-categorization of 91 persons, who were part
of the said writ petition.
4. It is also the case of the respondent before the Tribunal that the Award
was implemented by the CPWD in the year 1997. The respondent
approached the Tribunal by filing an OA.606/2005 with a prayer that
since he had been continuously working without any break as casual
worker on muster roll basis on the post of Assistant Pump Operator for
more than 21 years, he was entitled to be regularized. This OA was
contested by the petitioners herein. However, the Tribunal by an order
dated 01.12.2005 disposed of the OA with a direction that the applicant
(respondent) herein should clear the trade test which is held every year
and in case he qualifies the same, his prayer for regularization would be
considered and would relate back to his initial appointment along with
all consequential benefits as accorded to the similarly circumstanced
persons. Aggrieved by the aforesaid directions, the present petition has
been instituted.
5. We may note that while issuing notice in this matter on 27.09.2006, the
operation of the impugned order was stayed. This interim order was
then modified when, on 30.07.2007, this Court directed that the
respondent be given an opportunity to take the trade test as and when it
is held. The respondent thereafter appeared in the trade test. His result
was brought to Court in a sealed cover which was opened and he was
found to be successful. On 08.07.2008 while issuing Rule DB, in
CM.No.12103/2006 the following order was passed:
"CM.No.12103/2006
During the pendency of the writ petition, the
Respondent has passed the trade test sometime in
December, 2007.
Accordingly we modify the order dated 27th
September, 2006 and direct the Respondent be regularized
from the date from which he had passed the trade test.
Of course, this is without prejudice to the claim of the
Respondent that he is entitled to be regularized from the
date of his initial appointment, which will be determined
when the writ petition is decided.
The application stands disposed of.
Dasti."
6. Since by the order dated 08.07.2008 it was directed that respondent no.1
be regularized, this order of the Division Bench was assailed and a
Special Leave to Appeal was filed before the Supreme Court of India
which was dismissed on 09.07.2009. In effect, the only point which
required determination is the date from which the respondent is be
regularized.
7. Mr. Khadaria, learned counsel for the respondent has drawn the attention
of the Court to the Seniority List of Operators. He submits that
identically placed persons, whose name stand at Serial Number 638, 639,
650, 661, 664, 697, 702, 708 and others, who also belonged to the
General Category, stand regularized since 07.05.1997. The learned
counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, has not been able to dispute
this submission of the learned counsel for the respondent.
8. Resultantly, we find no merit in the writ petition and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
9. The petitioners will comply with the orders passed by the Tribunal
within four weeks from the receipt of this order.
CM.APPL 33208/2016(direction)
10. The application stands disposed of in view of the order passed in the
present writ petition.
G.S.SISTANI, J
VINOD GOEL, J
NOVEMBER 28, 2016
pst
