M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) SINCE common question of law and facts are involved in both the writ applications, they have been heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
(2.) THE petitioner of WPS No. 2638/ 2002 was taken in service by the respondents in the year, 1981 and was absorbed in the work charged establishment in 1987. Petitioner of WPS No. 2732/2002 was appointed in the work charged establishment in the year 1990. They seek a direction for regularization of their services and for payment of salary which is due since December, 2000. 2. Petitioners case is that they have been working since June, 1981 on muster roll basis in the Rural Engineering Organization, Ramgarh Sub -Division on the post of Night Guard. In 1987, as per the Government order No. 55 dated 11.11.1987, the petitioners along with other persons were absorbed in the work charged establishment. The service book of the petitioners was opened and provident fund is being deducted for the last 14 years. It is alleged that although similarly situated persons juniors to the petitioners have been regularized but the case of the petitioners has not been considered. 1996 (9) SCC 266, in support of the proposition that the work charged establishment employees are engaged on temporary basis and their appointments are made for execution of a specified work. The post in the work charged establishment is not a cadre post and, therefore, question of regularization of service does not arise. Before appreciating the contention made by the learned Advocate General I would first like to refer the averments made by the respondents in their counter affidavit. It has not been denied or disputed that the petitioner was taken in service on daily wages in 1981. The petitioner continuously worked on daily wages from 1981 to 1987 his services was taken under the work charged establishment as Roller Khalasi. It is, therefore, not disputed that the petitioners have been continuously working since 1981 and 1990 without break in service even for one day.
(3.) IN Piara Singhs case (supra) their lordships observed that merely because the work charge establishment employees worked for 4 -5 years, no right is created for regularization of their services. In Purushottams case (supra) a question with regard to seniority came for consideration before the Supreme Court in respect of the employees under work charged establishment absorbed in regular cadre.;