- (1.) The petitioner was working as a contract labourer through a contractor in the Durgapur Steel Plant since the year 1978. In an accident in the plant he lost his left forearm which had to be amputated. In the year 1994 when the authorities of the plant were going to appoint some unskilled labourers, the petitioner applied for regularization absorption which was not responded to. The petitioner in the circumstances filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus which was disposed of by B. P. Banerjee, J. as His Lordship then was, by an order dated 26th September, 1994 by which the authorities were directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner by a reasoned order. The Chief Personnel Manager of the Durgapur Steel Plant by his letter dated 12/13th January, 1995 rejected the prayer for absorption on the ground that the writ petitioner was medically unfit. The petitioner once again invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court. His writ petition was registered as C. O. No.17397 (W) of 1995. The petition was allowed by D.K. Basu, J. as His Lordship then was, by an order dated 30th June, 1997 by which the authorities were directed to absorb the writ petitioner. To be precise the operative portion of the judgment and order was as follows:- "In such view of the matter, I direct the respondent-company to absorb the petitioner at the earliest, preferably by 30th June, 1997, from three percent quota available for the disabled persons category. No disabled person shall be appointed from the quota of 3% reserved for handicapped persons until the petitioner is absorbed. Such exercise has to be completed by 30th June, 1997. For the purpose of appointment, the maximum age limit shall be relaxed and this preference shall not create any precedent."
(2.) The Steel Authority preferred an appeal. From a supplementary affidavit affirmed on behalf of the Authorities it appears that on 13.11.97 a Division Bench presided over by S.B. Sinha and R. K. Mitra, JJ. as Their Lordships then were stayed the operation of the order dated 25th February, 1997. The appeal was finally dismissed by a Division Bench presided over by A.K. Mathur, C.J. and Ranjan Kumar Mazumdar, J. as Their Lordships then were by a judgment and order dated 23rd June, 2000 on the basis of the following reasons:- "In fact, the petitioner had been in service for 18 years and there is a handicapped quota and it is not the case of the appellant that there is no vacancy against this quota, ft is of no significance that whether there is any clause for handicapped persons in the tripartite agreement or not. But there is three percent handicapped quota and against that this incumbent can be absorbed as he is old worker of this unit who has spent his whole life here. Therefore, in this background, we are of the opinion that the direction given by the learned Single Judge cannot be said to be wrong so as to warrant interference in this appeal. However, the respondents are directed to absorb the writ petitioner against handicapped quota within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order."
(3.) The Steel Authority preferred a special leave petition challenging the order of the Division Bench which came up for hearing before the Supreme Court on 28th November, 2000 when Their Lordship passed the following order:- "On an undertaking being given by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the judgment will be implemented and the respondent will be asked to do a job which he can suitably do and further that the legal expenses of the respondent will be borne by the petitioner, we issue notice to show-cause returnable after four weeks.";