AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Lok Pal Singh, J
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-
i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 26.06.2018 passed by respondent no.1 in contravention of the higher authority.
ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents provide the joining to the petitioner in pursuance of the letter dated 08.03.2019 issued by the respondent no.2 in compliance of the higher authority.
Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner was appointed against the vacant post of Laboratory Peon from outsourcing agency District Youth Welfare and Prantiya Rakshak Dal Officer, Tehri Garhwal, vide letter no.478/duty/2016-17 dated 28.09.2016 and was permitted to work in Government Post Graduate College, New Tehri, @ Rs.400/- per day. Pursuant to the said letter, the petitioner rendered her services. Her work was appreciated by respondent no.1, however, the respondent no.1 vide letter dated 26.06.2018 informed the petitioner that she had been appointed for six months which is going to complete on 01.07.2018. Pursuant to said letter, the petitioner was not permitted in the respondent department after 30.06.2018. When this fact came to the knowledge of local authorities, the Chairman of Nagar Palika Parishad Tehri wrote a letter to the District Magistrate, Tehri Garhwal on 11.02.2019 and requested to continue the services of the petitioner. Subsequent thereto, the Hon'ble Chief Minister issued instructions to the authority concerned that the petitioner be permitted to continue on the said post and on the basis of said recommendation, respondent no.2 wrote a letter to the Principal on 08.03.2019 apprising him to maintain the service of the petitioner. The Principal of Government Postgraduate College New Tehri Garhwal wrote a letter to respondent no.2 requesting him to send proposal for appointment of the petitioner as per law.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, being the member of Prantiya Rakshak Dal, was appointed in the said College until further orders, vide appointment letter dated 28.06.2016, however, her services came to an end on 30.06.2018. He would submit that even after the recommendation of higher authorities the petitioner has not been permitted to work in the said College. He would further submit that an ad hoc or temporary employee should not be replaced by another ad hoc or temporary employee. To buttress his submissions, learned counsel would place reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and another vs. Piara Singh A.I.R. 1992 SC 2130
On a query by the Court, learned counsel would fairly submit that the petitioner is not working in the College since 30.06.2018 in view of letter dated 26.06.2018.
On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General would submit that the services of the petitioner have rightly been terminated after expiry of six months as per Government Order No. 129(1)/VI-I/2005-40(Yuva)/2002 dated 22.12.2015.
Impugned order dated 26.06.2018 reveals that petitioner's services came to an end w.e.f. 30.06.2018 on expiry of six months period. Admittedly, the petitioner was enrolled as a Prantiya Rakshak Dal volunteer and was appointed as Peon in Government Postgraduate College New Tehri on temporary basis @ Rs.400/- per day. With regard to discharge of duties and control of member of Prantiya Rakshak Dal, State Government has issued a Government Order dated 22.12.2005, clause 3 whereof specifically provides that in each and every District a Roster of trained member of Rakshak Dal shall be prepared and every member of Rakshak Dal be given duty for at least six months and thereafter as per the Roaster, member who served six months, shall be replaced by another member as per the Roster prepared at District Level so that every member of the Prantiya Rakshak Dal be given at least six months duties. Clause 3 of G.O. dated 22.12.2005 is extracted hereunder:-
"प्रान्तीय रक्षक दल के प्रषिक्षित स्वयं सेवकों की तैनती हेतु प्रत्येक जनपद में रोस्टर बनाया जाय। प्रत्येक स्वयं सेवक को एक बार में अधिकतम 6 माह के लिए तैनाती दी जाय उसके उपरान्त रोस्टर के अनुसार पूर्व में तैनात स्वयं सेवक को हटाकर नये स्वयं सेवक की तैनाती की जाय जिससे कि सभी स्वयं सेवको को यथा सम्भव डयूटी प्राप्त हो सके।"
In view of the aforesaid G.O., services of the petitioner has rightly been terminated after expiry of six months period on the basis of equity so that equal opportunity of employment be provided to every member of PRD. As far as the case of Piara Singh (supra) is concerned, the ratio of said judgment is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case as in the present case the State Government has itself issued G.O. dated 22.12.2005 thereby providing employment to member of Prantiya Rakshak Dal for a maximum period of six months and thereafter replacement of one member with another as per Roaster.
For the reasons recorded above, there is no merit in the writ petition. Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.