Japan Singh vs Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Visvavidyalaya, Palampur

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

Petitioner seeks regularization as Beldar w.e.f. the date when he completed eight years of service alongwith all consequential benefits.

Petitioner was appointed with the respondent-University as daily paid Labourer in July, 1994. His services were regularized as Beldar w.e.f. 06.07.2008. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was required to be regularized as Beldar w.e.f. 06.07.2002 on completion of eight years of service. The petitioner superannuated on 31.05.2015. Almost a year later, i.e. on 01.05.2016, he filed the instant petition claiming regularization retrospectively w.e.f. 06.07.2002.

The respondent-University has not denied the factual position that the petitioner had completed eight years of regular service as daily paid Labourer on 31. 12.2002 and the fact that the services of the petitioner were regularized as Beldar on 06.07.2008. The stand of the respondent is that the petitioner's services were regularized on the basis of State Policy dated 09.06.2006 as adopted by the respondent vide notification dated 14.06.2007, pursuant to which, the respondent created 169 posts of Beldar on 19.06.2008. It is against one of these posts that the petitioner was regularized on 06.07.2008.

Learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that prior to 2006 State Policy, the respondent-University had adopted 2000 regularization policy of the State Government. However, the petitioner had not completed eight years of service as Labourer by 31.03.2000-the cut-off date in the policy. Therefore, his services could not be regularized at that time. Additionally, the posts of Beldar were not available for regularizing the daily wage employees. No rejoinder disputing these facts and aspects has been filed by the petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record appended with the petition.

2006 regularization policy of the State Government was circulated on 09.06.2006 in respect of regularization of those daily wagers, who had completed eight years of continuous service as on 31.03.2004 against vacant posts. The record shows that 2006 policy for regularization of daily wage workers, who had completed eight years of continuous service as on 31.03.2004, was adopted by the respondent-University vide notification dated 14.06.2007. The relevant portion of the notification is extracted hereunder:-

"The Board of Management, CSK HPKV, Palampur (By Circulation) has been pleased to approve the adoption of policy as such contained in letter No.PER(AP)-C-B(2)-1/2006 Vol.II dated 9th June, 2006 from the Secretary (Personnel) to the Govt. of HP, regarding regularization of Daily Waged Contingent Paid Works in the University (Copy enclosed). The regularization of eligible Daily Waged/Contingent Paid Workers will be made against the vacant available posts and as per R&P Rules of the respective post. The regularization in all cases will be from prospective effect i.e. after the date of the order of regularization is issued after completion of all codal formalities and subject to instructions issued vide letter No.4-8/85-HPKV(GA)Vol.II/48227-66 dated 05.09.1985."

The record also shows that total 186 posts including 169 posts for Beldar-Class IV were created in the respondent-University vide notification dated 19.06.2008.

These posts were created exclusively for regularization of 169 Beldars. With the superannuation of the incumbents, posts were to be deemed to have been abolished. Pursuant to creation of these posts, 164 daily wage Beldars were regularized vide office order dated 06.07.2008 (Annexure A-1). Name of the petitioner figures at Sr. No.81 of the list.

From the undisputed facts noticed above, it is evident that the petitioner was not eligible for regularization under the 2000 regularization policy. Petitioner completed eight years of daily wage services as on 31.12.2002. However, the fact remains that he did not fall within the purview of 2000 regularization policy in existence at that time. State of Himachal Pradesh floated 2006 regularization policy for regularizing those daily wage employees, who had rendered eight years of continuous service as on 31.03.2004. Petitioner fell under the purview of this policy. The policy was adopted by the respondent-University vide notification dated 14.06.2007. 169 posts for regularizing the services of daily wage Beldars were created in the respondent-University on 19.06.2008. Regularization had to be from the prospective date in the facts and circumstances of the case, i.e. after the creation of the posts. The petitioner alongwith other similarly situated daily wage Beldars, 163 in number, was accordingly regularized on 06.07.2008. Petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any discrimination allegedly meted out to him. It also appears that the petitioner was satisfied with his regularization order issued on 06.07.2008. It is only a year later to his superannuation on 31.05.2015 that he woke up from slumber and filed instant petition on 01.05.2016 claiming regularization w.e.f. 2002. The petition cannot be stricto sensu said to be within the limitation period provided under Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act. Petition suffers from delay and laches.

For all the aforesaid reasons, there is no merit in the instant petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.