SUBHASIS RANA Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, BAIDYABATI MUNICIPALITY & ORS.
LAWS(CAL)-1996-6-38
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on June 04,1996

Subhasis Rana Appellant
VERSUS
The Chairman, Baidyabati Municipality And Ors. Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ASHYINI KUMAR & ORS. V/S. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. [REFERRED TO]
H C PUTTASWAMY VS. HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BANGALORE [REFERRED TO]
H G VAJRA SHREE VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

D.P. Kundu, J. - (1.)The writ petitioner's case is that a vacancy was created in a permanent post of typist due to resignation of one Bulbul Somaddar in the office of the respondent no. 1. The writ petitioner applied for the post of typist and an interview was held by the concerned authority and the concerned authority after being satisfied appointed to the said post of typist on casual basis with retrospective effect from 4.2.93 until further order. The said appointment of the petitioner on casual basis was made by an office order dated 15.3.93. The writ petitioner stated that above -referred Bulbul Samaddar was initially appointed to the post of typist on casual basis and thereafter was appointed temporarily on probation for one year to that post with effect from first April, 1991 and thus Bulbul Samaddar was regularised in the sevice. Said Bulbul Samaddar was subsequently confirmed to the said post of typist. It is the case of the writ petitioner that since said Bulbul Samaddar was appointed on casual basis and thereafter was regularized in the service and the writ petitioner was appointed on casual basis in the vacancy created due to resignation of Bulbul Samaddar, the writ petitioner should also be regularized in the service and that the writ petitioner has legitimate expectation to be regularised and/or Kabsorbed in the service of Baidyabati Municipality. The respondents in their affidavit -in -opposition stated that initially there were two sanctioned posts of typist in the pay scale of Rs. 1,040 -25 -1. 215 -30 -1, 485 -35 -1, 590 -40 -1. 670 -50 -1,920. These two posts of typist were held by Sri Dilip Mukherjee and Sri Kenaram Pathak. Subsequently Sri Dilip Mukherjee was appointed to the post of Assistant Accountant of the Municipality and thus one post of typist fell vacant and to carry on the work -load of typing job aforesaid Bulbul Samaddar resigned from the service with effect from 1.2.93 and the writ petitioner was appointed at first by Memo No. 3633/A -38 dated 15.3.93 purely on casual, daily wage, no work no pay basis at the rate of Rs. 25 per day with retrospective effect from 4,2.93. Thereafter, by Office Memo No. 3797/ A -38 dated 30.3.93 casual appointment of the writ petitioner, was terminated with effect from 1.4.93. Thereafter by Memo No. 76/A -38 dated 56.4.93. Thereafter by Memo No. 76/A -38 dated 5/6.4.93 the writ petitioner was again appointed on casual basis with effect from 5.4.93. Again his service was terminated with effect from 2.5.93 by office Memo No. 417/A -38 dated 28/30.4.93. The Writ petitioner was again appointed as casual typist on daily wage no work no pay basis for one month with effect from 4.5.93. After the expiry of one month from 4.5.93 the writ petitioner was not in service. He was again appointed for one month with effect from 9.6.93 as a casual typist on daily wage and no work no pay basis by Office memo No. 964/A -38 dated 8.6.93 the Writ petitioner's ' service was over and thereafter he was again appointed as a casual typist on daily wages of Rs. 28/ - for a month with effect from 2.12.93 vide Office Memo No. 3260/A -38 dated 1.12.93. It has been stated by the respondents that pursuant to the last Memo dated 1.12.93 the Writ petitioner worked as a casual typist upto 1.1.94 and thereafter he was not further appointed. It has been contended in the affidavit -in -opposition that the writ petitioner did not work continuously from 4.2.93 to 1.1.94 and the content of the certificate given by the former Chairman of Baidyabati Municipality on 12.4.95 which is Annexure 'D' to the Writ petition, is against the office record and has no factual basis. It has been alleged by the respondents that it seems that the Writ petitioner has procured the said certificate for the purpose of the present Writ proceeding.
(2.)The respondents further stated that there was a sanctioned post of Steno -cum -typist but considering the need of typing work of tile Municipality a post of another typist (3rd typist) was required and the Municipal Authority got the post of Steno -cum -Typist converted to the post of Typist with the proper sanction of the State Government Thereafter the Municipal Authority took steps for filling up the two substantive posts of typist through Employment Exchange and appointed two persons, namely. Sri Prasanta Ghosh and Sri Joyanta Chatterjee, out of the persons sent by Employment Exchange, in usual or allowable pay -scale. One vacancy was filled up on 1.1.94 and the other one was filled up on 2.4.94 and the other one was filled up on 2.4.94. It is a definite case of the respondents that there is no more vacant post of typist in the Municipality. The respondents stated that the appointment of one Sri Shyam Sunder Adhikari was on casual basis, on daily wages and on the basis of no work no pay for doing some urgent typing work. The respondents stated that the petitioner's claim that he had worked throughout the year without any break is absolutely without any basis and the writ petitioner was never assured by the respondents that he would be absorbed in permanent post of typist in the Municipality.
(3.)This court is of the view that the calim of the Writ petitioner for regularization in the service of the Municipality cannot be said to be based on proper foundation. The writ petitioner for about a year: with short breaks worked as a casual employee. The writ petitioner was lastly appointed as a casual typist by memo dated 1.12.93 and he worked upto 1,1.94. The present writ petition was filed in 1996. Therefore for about two years the writ petitioner was not in service of the Municipality, the certificate (Annexure 'D' of the Writ petition) dated 12.4.95 cannot be relied upon because the content of the said certificate has been disputed by the respondents' by saying that the same is against the office records The respondents further stated that from the office records it transpires that the writ petitioner did not work for two years at a stretch with effect from 4.2.93. it is a definite case of the respondents that the writ petitioner on -different occasions in between the period commencing from 4.2.93 to 1.I.M worked -as a casual typist on daily wages. It is also a definite case of the respondents that the writ petitioner did not work in any capacity under 'Baidyabati Municipality on and from 2.1.94. The respondents stated that the content of the certificate (Annexure D' to the Writ petition) given by the erstwhile Chairman certifying that the writ petitioner had worked in the office of the Municipal Commissioner of Baidyabati for two years at a stretch with effect from 4.2.93 as a typist is - untrue, incorrect and baseless. The writ' petitioner also could not produce any evidence, to prove that the stand taken by respondents in respect of Annexure 'D' to the writ petition is incorrect. Except Annexure 'D' the writ petitioner could not produce any evidence to prove that the stand taken by respondents in respect of Annexure 'd' to the writ petition is incorrect. Except Annexure 'D' the writ petitioner could not produce any evidence to show that in fact he had served the Municipality even after 2.1.94. Had the writ petitioner worked in the Municipality even after 2.1.94 then there must have been some evidence to prove such fact. In absence of any such evidence on record it is not possible for the court to hold that content of Annexure 'D' to the writ petition is correct.
;


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