Delhi High Court
Pankaj Kumar & Ors. vs East Delhi Municipal Corporation on 22 March, 2021
$-23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3702/2021 & CM APPLs. 11224/2021 (for ex-parte interim
relief), and 11226/2021 (for placing on record the additional
documents)
PANKAJ KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Rajiv Agarwal, Ms. L. Gangmei
and Ms. Meghna De, Advocates.
versus
EAST DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Namrata Mukim with Ms.
Garima Jindal, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
ORDER
% 22.03.2021
CM APPL. 11225/2021 (for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions and as per extant rules.
2. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 3702/2021
3. The eleven petitioners are aggrieved from the order dated 6 th January,
2021 of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New
Delhi in OA No.12/2021 preferred by them along with one other.
4. The aforesaid OA was preferred, claiming that the petitioners were
working as Primary Teachers on contractual basis in the respondent East
Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC), for about ten years prior to the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:05.04.2021
09:54:52
institution of the OA, and seeking a direction to the respondent EDMC to
regularise the services of the petitioners, instead of extending them year
after year, always keeping them under fear of non-extension.
5. CAT, in the impugned order has reasoned (i) that it was not in dispute
that regular selections for teachers were also taking place year after year; (ii)
that the petitioners, either did not take part in the regular selections or were
not successful therein; (iii) that in Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs.
Umadevi(3) (2006) 4 SCC 1, the practice of engaging employees on
contractual basis, against regular vacancies, was deprecated and it was
directed that as a one-time measure, scheme be framed for regularisation of
contractual employees working against regular vacancies; (iv) that the
aforesaid however was subject to the condition that the employees possess
requisite qualifications; (v) that the petitioners herein had chosen not to
participate in the regular selection process, which indeed had taken place;
(vi) that the en bloc regularisation of services of contractual employees, as
soon as they complete ten years of engagement, was unknown to law.
6. The OA was accordingly disposed of, with direction to the respondent
EDMC, that in case the respondent EDMC framed a scheme for
regularisation of contractual teachers, the petitioners shall also be considered
and would be entitled to benefit of relaxation of age limit to the extent
permissible in law.
7. Finding the order of CAT to be in accordance with law, we have
enquired from the counsel for the petitioners, the error therein and/or in
exercise of which power, relief can be granted to the petitioners.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:05.04.2021
09:54:52
8. Obviously, there is none.
9. The counsel for the petitioners however states that in another identical
matter, being W.P. (C) 11693/2019 titled Deen Bandhu Garg and Ors. Vs.
South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors., notice has been issued and
the said petition is listed for final disposal on 20th August, 2021.
10. The counsel for the respondent, appearing in advance notice, states
that the facts of Deen Bandhu Garg (supra) are different.
11. We have however still enquired from the counsel for the petitioners,
the basis on which this Court, in exercise of power under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, can order regularisation. In our opinion, it is not open
for us to do so. We may mention that though in Maharashtra State Road
Transport Corporation Vs. Casteribe Rajya P. Karmchari Sanghatana
(2009) 8 SCC 556 it was held that Umadevi supra is an authoritative
pronouncement for the proposition that High Courts and Supreme Court,
under Articles 226 and 32 of Constitution of India respectively, should not
issue directions for regularisation on permanent continuance of
temporary/contractual employees unless recruitment itself was made
regularly in terms of constitutional scheme and did not denude the Industrial
and Labour Courts from issuing directions for regularization in a matter of
public employment, but recently in Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Vs.
Krishan Gopal 2020 SCC OnLine SC 150 it was held that wide as the
powers are of Labour and Industrial Courts, they do not extend to a direction
to order regularization; where such a direction would in the context of public
employment, offend the provisions contained in Article 14 of Constitution
of India.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:05.04.2021
09:54:52
12. The counsel for the petitioner is unable to controvert.
13. Once it is so, no purpose will be served in merely issuing notice and
keeping this petition pending, thereby again lulling the petitioners into
inaction.
14. Dismissed.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J
AMIT BANSAL, J
MARCH 22, 2021/sr
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:ASHWANI
Signing Date:05.04.2021
09:54:52
