Sushil Chand vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Surinder Singh, J.—The petitioner by means of this petition seeks direction to the respondents to correct his seniority as per Annexure P12, i.e., letter of Executive Officer, Municipal Council addressed to the Director Urban Development and also to release due and admissible consequential benefits.

The petitioner was appointed as daily-wager in the respondents department on 1.4.1992 along with one Smt. Bimla Devi. It is the case of the petitioner that the services of said Bimla Devi were regularized as per Annexure P1 dated 20.9.2000, but qua the petitioner though regularization order was issued in March 2000 against a newly created post but the order was implemented one year thereafter. The petitioner had made several representations to respondent No. 3, but however, despite the communication made by the Executive Officer on 10.5.2010 to the Director vide Annexure P12 nothing was done. The said letter reads as under:-

OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL NAGROTA BAGWAN (KANGRA)

No. MCNB dated �������..

To

The Director, Urban Development, HP Shimla. Subject: Regarding seniority list.

Sir,

With reference to your letter NO.UD-H (B) (A) (I)-32/94-19578 dated 9.2.2010 on the subject cited above.

The seniority list of Sh. Sushil Chand S/o late Sh. Diwan Gir village Habibpura Nagrota Bagwan along with other daily waged employees was re-examined and found that inadvertently the seniority of the applicant was to be counted from April 1992 whereas it was referred as May 1992. The said mistake committed if any was not intentionally but due to the above stated contention/facts. The matter was already brought to the notice of the Directorate vide this office letter No. 279/NP dated 31.10.2000 later on the applicant was also regularized by the Government vide letter No UD-H(B) (1)-31/99-3483 dated 9.3.2001.

So far as the cases pertaining to other daily waged employees appointment/promotion are concerned the said procedure was adopted by the then President/NAC under the previous Act, 1968 in which the appointment/promotion powers of the employees were vested with the concerned municipality/NAC. After the Imposition of new municipal Act 1994 no appointment/promotion was made by this local body. Therefore, the report is submitted for your kind information please.

Yours faithfully, Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Nagrota Bagwan.

No. 369/MCNB dated 10.5.2010

Copy forwarded to:

Sh. Sushil Chand S/o late Sh. Diwan Gir R/o Habibpura Nagrota Bagwan for information please.

Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Nagrota Bagwan.

3rd respondent in reply admitted this position and submitted that the matter is pending decision with 2nd respondent. Especially when the 2nd respondent has not taken decision in the matter for more than a year, it means nothing is adverse against the petitioner, therefore, the respondents are directed to correct the seniority position of the petitioner as per Annexure P12 aforesaid and give all due and admissible consequential benefits to him within a period of three months.

However, the another relief sought qua implementation of regularization from March, 2000 instead of March 2001 cannot be granted for more than one reason, i.e., the regularization can only be ordered/allowed against a sanctioned post on the establishment of 3rd respondent and he was regularized against a vacancy when it was made available on its creation as is evident from Annexure P2. Significantly, petitioner failed to point out that earlier to that the post against which he was regularized was available to him whereas Bimla Devi was safai-karamchari and was regularized against the vacant post which was available for her. Lastly the respondents have denied in their reply that the regularization order was issued in March 2000. Thus, while allowing the first relief as above, the prayer for second relief is declined.

The petition is accordingly disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any.