TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) AN Amendment Application was filed in this case on 24.1.2000. However, the number was wrongly mentioned as CWJC No. 3345 of 1999(R) while this case is CWJC No. 3445 of 1999. Mr. Sunil Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner therefore prayed permission to make necessary corrections. Let him do so during the course of the day. The Amendment Application is allowed.
(2.) MR . Sunil Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although he had made numerous prayers, he however now, confines the writ application only to the extent indicated below : - - "(A) That his services which he was rendered on the post of Typist -cum -Clerk up to the stage when he has regularized as a Computer Assistant be ordered to be treated as a valid service so that the same enures to his benefit for all purposes; (B) That the respondents be restrained from treating the aforementioned period i.e., from 1985 to 1998 as an ad hoc period and they be directed to treat this as valuable service rendered by the petitioner; (C) That the respondents be directed to pay to the petitioner appropriate salary attached to the scale of Typist -cum -Clerk during the aforementioned period; and (D) That the respondents be directed to pay the salary of Computer Assistant on and from 15.5.1998 together with all consequential benefits. One of the moot questions that arise for consideration in this case is that once the services of the petitioner was regularized with effect from 15.5.1998 upon the own desire and volition of the respondents, can it be contended later on by the same respondents that the initial appointment of the petitioner was only, on an ad hoc basis, not according to rules or as stop gap arrangement?
(3.) THE short facts that are necessary to be taken note of are, that on 28.5.1984 a letter was sent from the respondents to the Employment Exchange, Jamshedpur requesting the latter to sponsor and send the names of candidates for appointment to the post of assistant in the Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority. In reply to the aforementioned letter, the Employment Exchange Officer, by letter dated 13.2.1985, sent the name of the petitioner along with other candidates and as a consequence thereof, they were subjected to interview on 4.6.1984. Having been found successful in the interview, the petitioner was accordingly appointed by Annexure -2 on the post of Typist -cum -clerk. He was appointed by Order dated 13.2.1985 on the post of Typist -cum - clerk in the scale of Rs. 580 -860 for a period of three months on an ad hoc basis. Thereafter, it appears that by Annexure -3, the respondents accepted the fact that the petitioner had appeared and passed in the Hindi Noting and Drafting Examinations held in relation to non Gazetted employees on 12.1.1986. The petitioner was declared successful and results were published as will apparent from Annexure -3. The petitioner thereafter continuously worked on the post of Typist - cum -clerk right up to the year 1988 without any break of service whatsoever.;