Jaswant Singh, J. - (1.) PETITIONER is working as a part time Sweeper in the office of Sub Station Engineer, Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (HVPNL) in District Sonipat. It is claimed that he is working on part time basis as Sweeper since February 1998 with the erstwhile Haryana State Electricity Board (successor HVPNL). Petitioner is claiming consideration for regularisation in terms of the policies dated 1.2.1999 (P -1), 17.10.2002(P -2) and 29.7.2011(P -4).
(2.) IT is apparent from the policies dated 1.2.1999 (P -1) and 17.10.2002(P -2) that the same were issued by the State Government and the petitioner has placed no document on record to show that those policies were ever adopted by the erstwhile Haryana State Electricity Board or by the successor Power Utility Companies. Be that as it may after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v. Umadevi, : (2006)4 SCC 1, the Government had issued instructions dated 25.4.2003 (P -3) withdrawing all the regularisation policies. As regards the policy dated 29.7.2011(P -4), it cannot be disputed that the same were issued by the State Government for its employees. Yet again no material has been placed on record showing that the same was ever adopted by the Power Utility Companies i.e. UHBVNL, DHBVNL, HVPNL and HPGC (successor companies of HSEB). Upon notice, Mr. Pardeep Singh Poonia, Standing Counsel for the Power Utility Companies very fairly states that the Power Utility Companies have adopted the instructions dated 29.7.2011 and now are in the process of adopting the latest policies dated 17.6.2014, 18.6.2014 and 20.6.2014. He further states that as and when the said policies are adopted the case of the petitioner shall be considered in terms of the relevant policy.
(3.) IN the face of the fair stand of the counsel for respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no objection if the present writ petition is disposed of in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents.;