JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Fifty-six persons have joined together in this writ petition. They are
working as drivers with the designation "casual bus driver," on being appointed
as such, by the second respondent, Calcutta Tramways Company (1978)
Limited.
(2.) The first bundle of undisputed facts is this. The second respondent
introduced the bus division, and in course of time acquired a fleet of 300
buses; 192 of them regularly ply on routes. For recruiting drivers it published
employment notices to invite applications, tested and interviewed the
candidates, prepared select lists, got the selected candidates medically
examined, and finally appointed the successful ones without any formal
appointment letters. From the very inception the drivers were appointed with
the designation "casual bus driver". Through same processes and with same
designation, the petitioners were appointed during the period from December
23rd, 1994 to September 11th, 2001.
(3.) The further undisputed facts, which I treat as the second essential
bundle of facts for deciding the issues in the case, are these. On January 1st,
1999 the Transport Department of the Government of West Bengal (the first
respondent) issued an order for sanctioning, as a special case, regularization
of 350 such casual bus drivers. It was mentioned that in future no further
regularization would be allowed, and that all appointments should be made
following existing rules and norms. On the basis of the order, the second
respondent made 294 casual bus drivers permanent. Simultaneously it went
on appointing drivers with the designation "casual bus driver." At the present
moment there are 336 such bus drivers, including the petitioners in the present
case. The conditions of service of the employees of the second respondent
are governed by the duly framed standing orders, certified by the competent
authority under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders), Act, 1946,
Section 5(3).;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.