HUKAMTEJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The primary grievance in this writ petition is against an order passed by the District Education Officer (SE), Bathinda dated 18th September, 2009 de-regularizing the services of the petitioner. The case has chequered history born out of several rounds of litigation by a part-time sweeper (Janitor) appointed on 19th July, 1989. [The word, "Sweeper" is no longer a happy word and is replaced for the purpose of this order to read as "Janitor" and the Government would do well to replace the word, "Sweeper" with, "Janitor" in its rules of service]. The facts in brief are as follows : -

(2.) The petitioner had put in 10 years of service on part-time basis when a Screening Committee met in August and September, 1989 to consider the petitioner's case for regularization of services. His claim was rejected on the ground that his name was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange nor was he appointed on merit through open competition. Feeling aggrieved by the order, he approached this Court in CWP No.20020 of 2003. His claim was partially allowed by the Division Bench of this Court following his earlier judgment in CWP No.16655 of 2003 rendered on 15th March, 2004 in case Paramjit Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others. This Court examined the policy circular regarding regularization of Class-IV part-time employees working in various Government departments promulgated on 4th March, 1999. Of the many principles evolved in the policy to consider the cases of regularization, one of them was contained in paragraph 2(A)(iv) that in case, a claimant was appointed initially on parttime basis through Employment Exchange or through open advertisement in the press would alone be entitled to the benefit. The Court held such an oppressive clause as unconstitutional and directed that the petitioner's case be reviewed and re-considered without taking into consideration the offensive paragraph/clause and to do so within 3 months from the submission of the certified copy of the order dated 15th March, 2004.

(3.) The State of Punjab aggrieved by the order preferred an SLP before the Supreme Court which was dismissed on 8th April, 2005. Still dissatisfied with the order of the Supreme Court, a clarification application was filed before the Division Bench of this Court of the order dated 15th March, 2004 in which the following order was passed:-