Smt. Kamla Joshi & Ors. v. Department of Forest & Ors.

Judgment

#1. Department of Forest-through its Secretary, Govt. of U.P., Lucknow.

#3. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, U.P., Lucknow. Conservator of Forest, Working Plant Circle (1st), Nainital, U.P.

#4. Conservator of Forest (Western Circle), District-Nainital, U.P.

#5. Chief Conservator of Forest (Management and Forest), Nainital, U.P. ………….Respondents. Dated: 29.03.2006 Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J.

Heard Sri Rajendra Dobhal, Advocate petitioners and Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2

#2. By the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order-dated

04.05.1993 (Annexure No. 12 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 3 and order of termination passed by the respondent no.2. Further prayer has been made for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to give effect to order dated 04.05.1993 (Annexure No. 12 to the writ petition) and other such orders passed by the respondent no. 2 and to direct the respondents to retain the petitioners in the service as Class III employees/compositors in the U.P. Forest Department with all consequential benefits. Further prayer has been made for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners as Class III employees/compositor in the Corporation with all consequential benefits and regular scale with effect from the date of initial appointment.

#3. Briefly stated, petitioner no. 1 was appointed on

21.05.1985 on Class – III post by the opposite party no. 3 as daily wager and was also directed to perform her duties of Compositor in the printing press. Similarly, the petitioner no. 2 was appointed as daily wager Class III employee on

28.02.1996 and was also directed to perform her duties of Compositor. Since the date of initial appointment, they are continuously working on their posts as daily wager.

#4. The petitioners have submitted that their family members have moved representations on 18th June, 1991 and 3rd June, 1991 for regularization of their services on their respective posts. 3

#5. On 03.08.1991, the respondent no. 5 informed the mother of the petitioner no. 1 regarding the claim of regularization of services that relevant records have been forwarded to the Government and accordingly necessary action shall be taken in due course of time. The respondent no. 2 further directed the respondent no. 3 to take necessary action regarding the regularization of petitioners’ services.

#6. In pursuance of the letter-dated 03.08.1991, the opposite party no. 3 served a notice on the petitioners through a letter dated 19.08.2002 informing that w.e.f. September, 1992, It will not be possible to keep them in service.

#7. Petitioners have submitted that on the one hand, the aforesaid notice was served on the petitioners, but on the other hand, on 22.08.1992, they were directed by the respondent no. 3 to approach the Administrative Training Institute, Nainital (Indian Administrative Academy) necessary training in Computer Working.

#8. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the petitioners joined computer training and on 31.12.1992, they completed the computer training course. For the said training, the petitioners have been issued a certificate on 31.03.1993.

#9. During the course of the training, the petitioner no. 2 received a letter dated 23.03.1992 from the office of respondent no. 3 with the intimation that the Government Press is likely to be closed down, therefore, the question for creation of posts of Computer don’t arise. 4

#10. Thereafter, respondent no. 3 made an enquiry regarding the progress in computer training.

#11. After the completion of training, the petitioners resumed the charge of Compositor.

#12. Petitioners have submitted that they have orally requested the opposite party no. 3 in the month of March, 1993 that since they have completed their training of computer course, therefore, they may be posted on the posts of Class III so that their knowledge of computer may be utilized.

#13. On 26.03.1993, the respondent no. 3 informed the petitioners that the State Government by an order dated

06.02.1993 has directed the department to stop appointment of daily wage employees and due to non-sanction of posts of compositor, petitioners’ service after 31.03.1993 shall be ceased to exist.

#14. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the letter dated 26.03.1993 apparently shows that the Government Order dated 06./02.1993 prohibiting the appointment of daily wage employees has got prospective effect and the respondent no. 3 had issued the letter dated 26.03.1993 in a very arbitrary manner ignoring the material facts that the petitioners have been continuing in services as a daily wager since 1985-86 and the Government Order will not affect the petitioners’ services.

#15. The grievance of the petitioners is that in-spite of aforesaid letter on account of non-existence of work, the petitioners have been continuing in service, but all of a sudden, they have been served by an order dated 04.05.1993 5 informing then that their services shall be ceased to exist after

30.06.1993.

#16. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. Vs. Putti Lal reported in 2002D(1) E.L.C. 524 (S.C.).It was also a case of daily wagers of Forest Department. The Apex Court has held as under: “So far as the State of Uttaranchal is concerned, a scheme for regularization of daily workers has been produced before us which prima facie does not appear to be objectionable excepting the provisions regarding qualification regularization. Be it stated that the qualification essential for being regularized would be the qualification as was relevant on the date of particular employee was taken in as a daily wager and not the qualification, which is being fixed under the Scheme. The that he employees have been allowed to continue for so many years indicates the existence or necessity for having such posts. But still it would not be open for the court to indicate as to how many posts would b e created for the absorption of these daily wage workers. Needless to mention that the appropriate authority will consider the case of these daily wagers sympathetically who have discharged the duties for all these years to the satisfaction of their authority concerned. So far as the salary is concerned as we have stated in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh, a daily wager in the State of Uttaranchal would also be entitled 6 to the minimum of the pay scale as is available to his counter parts to in the Government until his services are regularized and he is given regular scale of pay.”

#17. Liberty is given to the petitioner to represent the authority, who shall decide the same in accordance with the relevant rules and relevant G.O.s. However, o relief can be granted under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

#18. Subject to above, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

29.03.2006 Rathour (Rajesh Tandon, J.)