- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) These two writ petitions arise out of the order passed in O.A./051/00225/2014 dated 07.03.2017 by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Ranchi. The prayer of the applicants for regularization of their services as a onetime measure on the strength of their claim that they have been continuing for more than 10 years in the Cattle Yard Section of Military Farm, Namkum on daily wages and on job basis, has been rejected by the learned CAT holding as under: "4. Admittedly, there is no appointment letter which would have shown the condition of appointment. If there is casual work for a short period, the persons working as casual labour cannot be regularized and for that regular post to be created with atleast 8 hours of continuous job. In the Military Farm, the work of the applicant is mostly confined to maintenance of cows in the farm including milking and such post cannot be regularized without a sanctioned post. Daily rated casual labours cannot ask for regularization when they are not working against a sanctioned post. Whole claim of the applicants is misconceived and no relief can be granted by this Tribunal at this distance of time. Before pronouncement of constitutional Bench judgment in the case of Uma Devi, the matter could have been viewed from a different angle. Had the applicants approached this Tribunal at that point of time, but after pronouncement of the said judgment there cannot be any public appointment without resorting to public advertisement and following a recruitment process. Since the present applicants had not availed such opportunity prior to 2006, cannot be granted any relief at this distance of time, that too without any specific norms of appointment or condition of service or working pattern in the farm. There is considerable force in the submission of ld. Counsel for the respondents is that now the day-today casual work of the farm has been outsourced and the applicants working under contractor and not directly under the respondents and, as such, question of regularizing of service does not arise. Considering from all angles, we did not find any merit in the submission of the applicants for a suitable direction to the respondents. Hence ordered. 5. The O.A., being devoid of merit, is dismissed. No costs."
(3.) Applicants being aggrieved are before us and have inter alia contended as follows: Applicant No. 1 and 2 (writ petitioner no. 1 and 2 in W.P.S. No. 4220 of 2017) were employed w.e.f. 24.11.1994 and applicant no.3 (writ petitioner no. 3 in W.P.S. No. 4220 of 2017) was employed in 1995 on the post of Mazdoor on sanctioned strength, on daily wages and on job basis w.e.f. 1998 till the filing of the writ petition. Applicant no. 4 to 18, who are writ petitioners in W.P.S No. 4267 of 2017 claim to have been working since 2001 uninterruptedly on daily wages. According to the petitioners, during pendency of the writ petitions respondents have stopped taking work from August 2018 and no payment are being made to them. The prayer of the writ petitioners for a direction upon the respondents to continue with their engagement during pendency of the writ petition made through I.A. No. 10218 of 2019 and I.A. No. 10219 of 2019 in the respective petitions were declined vide order dated 06.02.2020 by this Court. Petitioners have relied upon the decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka vs Uma Devi , 2006 4 SCC 1 in support of their plea for regularization as they have worked for 10 years on duly sanctioned post without any cover of orders of the Court or Tribunal. According to them, learned CAT has not appreciated the principles laid down in the case of Uma Devi ( supra), which has been further explained in the case of State of Karnataka Vrs. M.L.Kesari , 2010 9 SCC 247. Petitioners contend that one similarly situated employee Sanjay Kumar Yadav, who was also selected with applicant no.1 as per Annexure-2/1 to W.P.S. No. 4220 of 2017 has been regularized pursuant to the order passed by the learned CAT in OA No. 187/2004 dated 20.08.2004. It is submitted that challenge thereto before this Court in W.P.S. No. 2692 of 2005 was negatived. The Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC 8885-8887/2010 preferred by the Union of India was also dismissed on the ground of delay as also on merits by order dated 12.07.2010 (Annexure-3/4 and 3/2 respectively). Petitioners further contend that the respondents have without following the procedure prescribed under the Industrial Dispute Act closed the Military Farm at Namkum and retrenched the applicants.;