- (1.) As the common question of law is involved in Civil Writ Petition No.5764, 7268,6071, 6263, 6155, 6156, 6157, 9290, 9339 and 9340 the same are being disposed of by a common judgment.
(2.) Vide the awards impugned in these petitions, the Labour Court directed regularisation of the services of private respondents against which these writ petitions were filed in the Court. It was submitted that as the Labour Court had passed the award on the basis of the judgment of this Court in Piara Singh V/s. State of Haryana, 1988 4 SLR 739the same was liable to be quashed on the ground that Special Leave Petition had been admitted in the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitions were earlier directed to be listed for admission after the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and later on admitted. The Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Haryana was decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court (State of Haryana V/s. Piara Singh, 1992 AIR(SC) 2130The Hon'ble Supreme Court in that case referred to the policy of regularisation framed by the State of Haryana and observed that so far as the State of Punjab was concerned, Shri G.K. Bansal, Under Secretary to Government Punjab, Department of Personnel, had filed an affidavit stating that the instructions issued by the Haryana Government for regularisation of the services of Class III as ad hoc employees contained in their notification shall be adopted by the Punjab Government mutatis mutandis. It was further observed that the normal rule was for regular appointment but exigency of administration may some time call for an ad hoc or temporary appointment to be made. It was further observed that ad hoc and temporary employee should not be replaced by another ad hoc or temporary employee. It was further held : "So far as the work-charged employees and casual labour are concerned, the effort must be to regularise them as far as possible and as early as possible subject to their fulfilling the qualifications, if any, prescribed for the post and subject also to availability of work. If a casual labourer is continued for a fairly long spell say two or three years, a presumption may arise that there is regular need for his services. In such a situation, it becomes obligatory for the concerned authority to examine the feasibility of his regularisation. While doing so, the authorities ought to adopt a positive approach coupled with an empathy for the person. As has been repeatedly stressed by this Court, security of tenures is necessary for an employee to give his best to the job. In this behalf, we do commend the orders of the Government of Haryana (contained in its letter dated 6.4.1990 (referred to hereinbefore) both in relation to work charged employees as well as casual labour."
(3.) In view of the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has already decided the case upon the basis of which the present petitions are admitted, we have examined the award and do not find any good ground to interfere. All these petitions are dismissed with no order as to costs.;