Gurpreet Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 5082 P&H

                                                                Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057534




CWP No. 8471 of 2023(O&M)                                        2023:PHHC:057534
                                                 -1-

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH


                                                       CWP No. 8471 of 2023(O&M)
                                                        Date of decision: 24.04.2023


Gurpreet Singh and others                                        ..Petitioners


                                    Versus

State of Punjab and others                                       ..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL Present: Mr. Kuljit Singh Bal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vishnav Gandhi, DAG, Punjab.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J(Oral)

1. The learned counsel representing the petitioners admits that

respondent no.3 and 4 are not instrumentalities of the State as defined in

Article 12 of the Constitution of India. He further admits that the petitioners

were employed by respondent no.3 and 4 as Data Entry Operators in order to

work for the Government. While relying upon the judgment passed in

Rashmi Rekha Dash vs. State of Odisha and another, W.P.(C) No.16906

of 2020, he submits that since the petitioners were discharging the work of

regular government employees, though through out source agency, hence the

impugned orders being stigmatic in nature are liable to be set aside.

2. This Court has considered the submissions of the learned

counsel representing the petitioners.

3. It is evident on reading of the impugned orders passed on

05.11.2022 (Annexure P-3 to P-10), that on being found that there was large

scale fraudulent manipulations in the official record while registering BS-IV

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057534

CWP No. 8471 of 2023(O&M) 2023:PHHC:057534

type vehicles, respondent no.3 and 4 have dispensed with the services of the

petitioners. In fact, this matter is already being considered by the Court in

Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.154 of 2021.

4. This Court has carefully read the judgment in Rashmi Rekha

Dash's case (supra). The writ petition was filed to direct party no.2 to issue

a formal order of regularization of her services as a Data Entry Operator.

The Court on the basis of a previous order passed by the High Court while

upholding the decision of the Tribunal in a previous writ petition issued the

directions. The question of maintainability of the writ petition in the context

of Article 12 of the Constitution of India was not deliberated.

5. Though, the Central Government has enacted Contract Labour

(Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, however, on the basis of permission

granted under the various provisions of the Act, it is permissible to employ

the services of an outsourcing agency for performing certain functions. In

the exercise of writ jurisdiction, this court does not find it appropriate to pass

orders on merits which may prejudice the interest of any of the contesting

parties. The petitioners, if so advised, may avail the alternative remedy.

6. Disposed of accordingly.

7. At this stage, the learned counsel representing the petitioners

relies upon the Punjab Ad-hoc Contractual, Daily Wage, Temporary, Work

Charged and Outsourced Employees' Welfare Act, 2016.

8. Sh. Vishnav Gandhi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab,

submits that the validity of the aforesaid Act was subject matter in Civil

Writ Petition No.4187 of 2017 and a statement has already been made that

the provisions of this Act have been kept in abeyance.

                                       2 of 3

                                                                Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057534




CWP No. 8471 of 2023(O&M)                                       2023:PHHC:057534

9. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

April 24, 2023                                        (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt                                                          JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned               :             Yes/No
Whether reportable                      :             Yes/No




                                                               Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057534

                                       3 of 3