Govind Mathur, J. - (1.) THIS matter came up for orders on an application seeking interim directions, however, with the consent of parties this petition for writ itself is heard finally.
(2.) THE factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner while in service of the Municipal Board, Jalore was retrenched from service on 31.8.1988 and validity of that was assailed by the petitioner by way of availing remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The industrial dispute relating to retrenchment of the petitioner was referred to the Labour Court, Jodhpur by the appropriate government under a notification dated 12.1.1993. The Labour Court after adjudicating the dispute answered the reference by the award dated 1.5.1996. The Labour Court declared retrenchment of the petitioner illegal and, therefore, set aside the same. The petitioner was declared entitled for reinstatement in service with back wages from the date of reference made by the appropriate government. As a consequent to the award dated 1.5.1996 the petitioner was reinstated and a conscious decision was taken by the Government of Rajasthan to screen the petitioner to regularise him in service. The screening committee consisting of four members viz. the Additional Collector, Jalore; Deputy Commissioner (Regional), Department of Local Self Government; Chairman, Municipal Board, Jalore and the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Jalore was accordingly constituted. The committee on screening recommended for regularisation of the petitioner in service. The petitioner, in the meantime, also claimed for grant of annual grade increments but the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Jalore instead of granting the same, passed an order dated 3.2.2007 terminating the petitioner from service. The order aforesaid is challenged in this petition for writ.
(3.) THE contention of the petitioner is that the order impugned dated 3.2.2007 is highly unjust and arbitrary as the petitioner is in service of the respondent Board from last about 19 years and despite availability of vacancy he has been terminated from service. It is also urged that after a conscious decision to regularise the petitioner in service there was no occasion to retrench the workman afresh. In reply, it is stated that in view of the law laid down in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. v. : (2006)IILLJ722SC , no order of regularisation in service could have been passed, therefore, under the instructions of the Government of Rajasthan the petitioner was retrenched from service.;