SHAMU SINGH Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR
LAWS(GAU)-1994-9-8
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on September 09,1994

H.SHAMU SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MANIPUR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

A.K.JAIN'S CASE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. PIARA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
J AND K PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION VS. NARINDER MOHAN [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)In these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for declaring the order dated 2.9.88 issued by the Chief Engineer, Department of Irrigation & Flood Control, Govt. of Manipur, terminating their services, as null and void and for writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioners. As the facts of the cases and the points of law raised in all these writ petitions are more of less common,, this batch of 16 writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.)The brief facts as stated in the writ petitions are that the petitioners were appointed in the posts of Gauge Reader, Laboratory Assistant, Foreman Mechanic, Assistant Driller, Fitter, Jugali, Electrical Ministry and Electrician during the months of January, February and March, 1985, by the Chief Engineer, Irrigation & Flood Control Department, Government of Manipur, on adhoc basis. Pursuant to the said appointments, the petitioners joined their respective posts and their adhoc appointments were extended from time to time. While they were working in such ad-hoc employment, during the year, 1985, Departmental Promotion Committee was held for regularisation of the service of the petitioners and several other adhoc employees. Although the petitioners appeared in the said Departmental Promotion Committee, their results were not declared. On the other hand nine Lower Division Clerks who had been similarly appointed on th ad hoc basis also appeared before the Departmental Promotion Committee and their results were declared and they were regularised by order dated 2.9.88 of the Chief Engineer, Irrigation & Flood Control Department, Government of Manipur. Thereafter, the Department of Personal & Administrative Reforms (Personal Divisio), Goernment of Manipur, issued office Memorandum dated 31,5.86, according to which, persons appointed on ad hoc basis under the Government of Manipur upto 31.12.84 were to be regularised with the effect from 31.5.86. Finally, by a common office order dated 2.9.88. of the Chief Engineer, Irrigation & Flood Control Department, Government of Manipur, it was declare that 27 persons including the petitioners would cease to be in their respective sevice with effect from 5.9.88. The petitioners have challenged to said order dated 2.9.88 of the Chief Engineer, Irrigation & Flood Control Department, Government of Manipur, on the ground that it is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and that as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in various decision the petitioners are entitled to be regularised in their respective posts having put in more than 4 years service.
(3.)In the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, it has been stated that the petitioners were appointed on adhoc basis and their appointments were purely temporary in nature and were liable to be terminated. The respondents have further stated that the appointment were also made without any proper advertisement or requisition from the Employment Exchanges and also without affording any opportunity to. other eligible candidates and without any selection. Regarding the Departmental Promotion Committee held in the year, 1985, for filling up various vacancies in the Irrigation & Flood Control Department, it has stated that the Departmental Promotion Committee was not approved by the Government. A copy of the letter dated 19.9.88 of the Government of Manipur in the Secretariat IFC Department to the Chief Engineer Irrigation & Flood Control Department not approving the Departmental such action of the respondents in regularising the service of nine Lower Division Clerks and terminating the service of the petitioners amount to discrimination, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.